Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 456

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 450

←

Archive 454

→

Unable to access more than two names for editing before I am stopped

have been adding award information to personal pages for people who are laureates of The Lincoln Academy of Illinois. The Lincoln Academy of Illinois is a not for profit, nonpartisan organization which honors outstanding Illinoisans each year. In the award notation added to the Wikipedia page, there is a link that goes to the Lincoln Academy website where the laureate is listed. This addition should be useful for people who are researching an individual and using Wikipedia as a historical resource. After adding the Lincoln Academy award to several of the recipients’ Wikipedia pages, I received a warning and was subsequently prevented from adding information to additional pages. Apparently that was because the Wikipedia system thought my additions might be spam. If someone could help, I would like to continue adding the award notation for Lincoln Academy of Illinois laureates to their existing Wikipedia pagesThurstonD63 (talk) 20:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi @ThurstonD63: and welcome to the Teahouse. Your question was already answered when you asked it at the help desk yesterday. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners on how to reference articles better. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

@ThurstonD63: I sampled a few cases where your edits triggered the “link spamming” filter, and in each case you were attempting to add a link to your website both as a reference and as an external link. I cannot imagine why anyone would do that, for external links are for sites which are not used as references. Also the fact that you are adding links to your organization’s website to multiple articles looks like Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming to me. My advice is that you do not add any external links to your organization’s website. —teb728 t c 01:00, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Looking more closely, I see that your references were not enclosed in ref tags and that some of your link spamming slipped past the filter. I have fixed one article by inserting the ref tags and deleting the link spamming. —teb728 t c 01:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I fixed the rest of your edits as well. —teb728 t c 09:13, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Someone please fix the "please report this error" functionality?

Someone please fix the "Wikipedia:Edit_filter/False_positives/Reports&action=submit" functionality of Wikipedia. A false "An automated filter has identified this edit as potentially unconstructive, and it has been disallowed. If this edit is constructive, please report this error." occurred. When attempting to use the "report this error", pasting the text into the page as per the "}}" , the "please report this error" was disallowed with the same message. If it is impossible to paste the text that triggers false positives, how will the false positives ever be eliminated?138.163.106.71 (talk) 02:16, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse anonymous user. According to the edit filter log, you were trying to add ASCII art to Talk:Heart Rhythm Society. If that is what you were trying to do, it is not allowed. If that is not what you were doing, describe what you were doing: describe it—don't enter it. —teb728 t c 09:39, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

My talkpage

I have a lot of content piling up on my talk page (18 sections). I would like to know how to add the archive template seen on other editor's talk pages. Joel.Miles925 (talk) 22:16, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Joel.Miles925. You can find detailed instructions at Help:Archiving a talk page. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:58, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the help! Joel.Miles925 (talk) 13:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Talk reproduced on article

An editor has posted material from my user talk on the Talk section of the completed (uploaded) article. I wish to have this 'talk' removed. It was my first attempt and I had considerable bother at preparing an article. That dialogue has been transferred from my user talk and is now posted with the article. I maintain that it shouldn't be - it reflects my inexperience and not anything to do with the subject. The editor in question claims I have to contact and administrator. How do I do this? Thank you? Balquhidder2013 (talk) 15:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Please do not accuse me of doing things I have not done. The content that you removed and I replaced was NOT on your talk page it was the talk page of an article here Talk:Feargus Hetherington. Theroadislong (talk) 16:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's an unusual request, and you have given no particular reason for it. Many articles have such discussions on their talk pages, particularly if created or worked on by new editors. And frankly, in this case it's so boring to an outsider that no-one is ever likely to read it. Maproom (talk) 16:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Balquhidder2013, there is probably evidence of most editors' initial inexperience lurking on talk pages. It's not something to worry about - you won't be judged by its existence once you have gained more experience. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Adaptive Sound Technologies

I reviewed Draft:Adaptive Sound Technologies and declined it, saying that it read like an advertisement. I then got the following on my talk page from User: Asoundtech ]]

Curious as to why this article was rejected. The reason given is because it reads like a promotional piece, however I don't see (line by line) how it is different from other business entries here. Do you not readily accept entries from small businesses? Is it because there are links to the corporate website included in the copy (a common practice with many entries I see here). Can you please give me an example from the copy, of what you mean when you say that it reads like a promotional piece? Please advise.

Can some other experienced editor please advise the author that using Wikipedia to promote their business is not the way that Wikipedia is supposed to work? (Alternatively, can some experienced editor please advise me that I was mistaken?) It appears to me that the author doesn’t understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a directory, and that small businesses are only listed if they are somehow notable in the peculiar Wikipedia sense. However, I welcome comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:04, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Asoundtech, phrases like "redefine the science of sleep" and "their innovations in the areas of ..." and all similar terminology are overtly promotional unless cited to a highly reliable independent source. For example, the first should be cited to a peer-reviewed scientific journal specializing in sleep. Otherwise, it must be removed. The content sounds like it was written for a marketing brochure, not an encyclopedia. Every single evaluative statement must be referenced to an independent, reliable source. This is not negotiable. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Cullen328: Thank you for your review and response. Based on your definition of appropriate materials for Wikipedia, "redefine the science of sleep" should and will be removed. Also, "innovations in the area of..." can be replaced with "patented technologies to help with sleep.." or such, which we can verify and have accurately sourced in this document.

If these strongly evaluative statements are removed, can we resubmit for review and hopefully approval? Asoundtech (talk) 06:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Asoundtech, every evaluative statement or claim in your draft article must be cited to a reliable, independent source. By independent, I mean entirely unconnected with the company. Your username indicates affiliation with the company, which is a conflict of interest. You are obligated to openly declare any financial conflict of interest, and this is mandatory. Your username may be in violation of policy. See WP:USERNAME and consider changing the name. Please be aware that this is a neutral encyclopedia, not a promotional vehicle for your company. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

As an update, the draft has been speedily deleted as blatantly promotional. There was a comment, with which I agree, that the draft read like it was taken from a marketing brochure. If this was true (and it too often is true), then the draft also was a copyright violation (although many new editors don't realize that you can't post your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia without releasing the copyright to all in the world). Robert McClenon (talk) 16:21, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Cullen328 and Robert McClendon. Thanks for your insight. Regardless of its size, this company is built from influential Silicon Valley legacy and should have an entry on this site.

The entry was not taken from a marketing brochure (horrible marketing if it was), and will be resubmitted with the items addressed in previous review. Asoundtech (talk) 17:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

To make my own page should I just click "new section link" and begin editing or is there a different method to do so?

To make my own page should I just click "new section link" and begin editing or is there a different method to do so?Igorsemenov1993 (talk) 17:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Igorsemenov1993. The answer to your question is probably No; but the best advice for you depends on exactly what you want to do, which isn't clear from your question, because "make my own page" has no meaning in Wikipedia.

I you mean you want to write something on your user page, then yes, since User:Igorsemenov1993 already exists, "New section link" is the way to add to it. Be aware that your user page is for sharing information about you as a Wikpedia editor: a little external information about you is acceptable, but it must be primarily about what you do or intend to do on Wikipedia.
If you mean you want to create an article, I strongly advise that, after reading Your first article, you use the Article wizard to create a draft in draft space.
If you mean you want to create an article about yourself, then please don't. See autobiography for why not. --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

upload image issue

I have a Wikipedia account. My username is: shadbakht I was trying to upload an image to this page:

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/科学

This page is the Chinese page equivalent of the Wiki article on “Science” here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

I modified the image found on the Science page called “The hierarchy of science” and translated all the titles into Chinese. I have the image saved as a png file (attached here in this email) and was trying to upload it to the Chinese Science page. Every time I tried it said that my file name already exists. I think there is an problem. How can I upload this image? Thank you

Shahrooz Shadbakht (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Shadbakht. You don't upload images to pages: they are first uploaded, either to Wikipedia, or to Wikimedia Commons, and then can be used in an article simply by name. If the image is uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, then every Wikipedia can access it, but if it is uploaded to a particular Wikipedia, only that Wikipedia can access it. This is why it is preferable to upload images to Commons if possible.

The restriction on doing this is that Commons only accepts images that are free for use: either public domain, or licensed under a licence such as WP:CC-BY-SA. If the image tha you started with, from Science, is from commons, then it is permitted for you to make a derivative work (such as by translating the text), and you can then upload it to Commons with copyright information stating that you are the creator of this derivative work, giving the source of the original. You need to upload it with a different title from the original, of course.

So, what is the image (give us the name of the original in the form [[:File:(exact name, with the right case)]] (remember the colon before 'File:', or it will display it here instead of giving us the link), and where are you trying to upload it? --ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

How to delete a draft?

Hello Editors.

I was going to restart on an article so I cleared out my sandbox and started over however I decided I wanted to try again at the article. I keep a copy of the wikicode in a google doc so I just copied and pasted it back in. I received a comment telling me not to make multiple near identical drafts. How can I delete my old draft in order to prevent this in the future?

Chariot Rider (talk) 17:25, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Chariot Rider. As long as you are the only editor who has made any substantial contribution to the page, stick {{db-author}} at the top of the source, and an admin will be along to delete it. --ColinFine (talk) 17:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Chariot Rider, it would probably make more sense to request the deletion of the more recent version (in your sandbox) and then to continue to work on the original version at Draft:Subterfuge (game). Cordless Larry (talk) 17:33, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Igorsemenov1993 (talk)

Thank you for your quick response. What I want to do is to add exactly three articles that will narrate about international students in the US. In order to do that all I have to do it to click "new section" and start editing, is that correct I just want to make sureIgorsemenov1993 (talk) 17:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Your question has already been answered below. Maproom (talk) 17:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Can someone explain to new editor whose English is not good?

I reviewed User:Jitso Keizer/sandbox and declined it. I didn’t understand whether it was a request for assistance in editing Wikipedia, or a request to change existing articles. I said that if it was a request to change articles, it needed to be supported by reliable sources. I noted that most scientists think that general relativity is the best explanation of gravitation, and that any theory that excludes black holes needs to address apparent evidence of the existence of black holes. User:Jitso Keizer then posted to my talk page:

Mr McClenon maintains that there is proven evidence of black holes. Such is not true, but very concentrated big masses obviously do exist. Note that near a black hole time stops, which contradicts fast processes around the Big Bang. The origin of the latter is not understood: a point does not exist in physics because it has no dimensions. Mr McClenon should read Yanchilin's book instead of adhering to a proven wrong theory, namely the general theory of relativity on which black holes, negative energy, accellerated expansion of the universe, inflation rest. Remark that potential is a scalar and adds, thus causing its delta positive in the denominator of the formula for an interval.

Aside from the fact that I didn’t say that there is proven evidence of black holes, only that there is apparent evidence of black holes that needs to be addressed, which is a content issue, there is a language problem that this editor admits. Does someone know what this editor’s first language is? Can someone explain that Wikipedia states the consensus of the scientific community, and that most scientists still accept general relativity (as well as quantum mechanics, and recognize that there is a known problem that there is no known way to integrate general relativity with quantum mechanics)?

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:42, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Kundan Srivastava

Hi,

I created Article about Kundan Srivastava (http://www.kundansrivastava.com/news/) in sandbox here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Techguy91/sandbox Robert McClenon tried to move this sandbox to Draft: Kundan Srivastava, and was unable to do so. There have been two Miscellany for Deletion drafts of biographies of this individual, both of which resulted in deletion, and the title is now salted against re-creation. Please discuss this with the salting administrator, He Said.

May Draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kundan_Srivastava was deleted many times but i believe this article reliable sources are enough to publish.

IMP Sources - http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Scary-video-Indian-woman-beats-chokes-mother-in-6758996.php http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Shocking-video-of-woman-assaulting-mother-in-law-emerges-online/articleshow/50537993.cms

Google News Source - https://www.google.co.in/search?q=kundan+srivastava&rlz=1C1CHWA_enIN677IN677&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjboeLPvZPLAhUIGo4KHR_VDTgQ_AUIBygB

Please resolve the issue.

Thanks

Techguy91 (talk) 17:54, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Please see the note I left on your talk page. Mkdw ^talk 19:12, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Instead of giving sometime to the correction why delete

Dear editors Being myself a new into the wiki group . Trying to add an article with little effort from my end . And I just copied an small information and it's not a copy write also. And the article which was published in indipedia was copied & paste one small information and forget to delete the tag site and the editor thought it was copy paste and copy right violation . If the editor would have read the article very clearly the way the article been written is completely different . And being a new here I need Support not suppression from experts . If something wrong we need guidance of articles are deleted at any moment without even giving a chance of corrections I feel little discourage of what I m doing . Need support from experienced editors to publish my article . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rk1985 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello! You might want to take a look here for advice on creating an article. Best of luck, GAB^Hello! 20:57, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Suggesting an article

How do I go about suggesting an article be written about someone? I tried writing one about an artist Dirk Palmer Bach, but it was deleted. I know him personally which may be a conflict of interest. Thank you in advance Ecourtc (talk) 17:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Ecourtc and welcome to The Teahouse. Wikipedia:Requested articles is the place to ask that an article be written. However, it can take a long time for that to be done. It would help if you provided independent reliable sources written from a neutral point of view. You need these anyway if you attempt to write an article yourself. You could also follow the advice at WP:AFC and write a userspace draft. Other editors will be more patient with you there as long as you don't violate copyright or do anything else really serious. Be sure to read about conflict of interest.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:01, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Replacement of a stub/short article

There is a very short article entitled James Ferguson-Lees. This contains several erors and hundreds of omissions, and is not worthy of a place in Wikipedia. James is now 87 years old and is without doubt one of the pre-eminent ornithologists of our age.

I have written a biography of James, whom I have known as a friend and colleague for 45 years. This biography is 100% accurate and is fully referenced. I want to know how I can replace the existing inadequate article with the longer one (7000 words) which I have written. 62.49.68.241 (talk) 23:03, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

This is about the article James Ferguson-Lees. I believe your praise of him is justified. But I have two warnings: replacing an existing article by one which is entirely your own work will receive extensive resistance, particularly from those who have contributed to the current article; and adding extensive citations of your own work may be interpreted as pushing your own point of view. At best, it will be an uphill struggle. What I would recommend is to describe your concerns, and proposed changes to the current article, on the article's talk page, and hope that other editors will make the changes. As a "connected person", you should not try to edit it yourself. Even I, with limited knowledge of but great respect for Ferguson-Lees' work, feel that my partiality for him precludes me from editing the article, so I regret that I won't be helping you with actual edits. Maproom (talk) 23:25, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

The article has had relatively few editors to date, so I wouldn't overestimate the amount of resistance there will be. Of course, that shouldn't change the fact that you need to observe Wikipedia's policies, 62.49.68.241, but I am encouraged by the fact that you are aware for the need for referencing. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I see that the article George Bristow (ornithologist) has no in-line references at all, a state that we abhor here on Wikipedia. If you could improve that article by supporting its statements with references to your book, I think everyone would approve. Maproom (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. There are a number of things that you should know before proceeding. Wikipedia's content is built on three fundamental principles we call the "core content policies". They are that Wikipedia articles:

must be verifiable (meaning that readers should be able to check that what is being written is true),
written from a neutral point of view (meaning that all opinions and viewpoints on a topic are represented fairly and without bias), and
must not contain original research (meaning we only write about what reliable sources have written about).

Jointly interpreted, these three policies form the backbone for almost every other content policy or guideline we have here.

Writing a biography about someone whom you know very closely, such as a friend or coworker, is discouraged on Wikipedia because you have what we call a conflict of interest ("COI"). Editors with a conflict of interest in a topic area often have an unintentionally distorted view of that topic area, and this conflict of interest has a significant potential to go against some of our core content policies. For example, you might unconsciously over-embellish your friend, or perhaps omit verifiable facts that may be negative or controversial—this would violate neutral point of view. Alternatively, you might inadvertently add details that haven't been published in reliable sources—a violation of verifiability and no original research. Because of this strong tendency, the Wikipedia community discourages editing in areas you have a conflict of interest in.

Although we discourage it, we don't outright prohibit editing with a COI either. To do so successfully, you must have an especially solid understanding and strong command of our expectations. Consider editing other topics for a while to gain experience. Carefully read our guideline on conflict of interest editing. Then, describe the changes you would like to see at Talk:James Ferguson-Lees, adding the following code to the top of your note: {{edit request}}. This will notify other editors that you have a conflict of interest and wish to submit a major change to the article. These other editors will review your proposed article and make the changes, if the content satisfies our policies. If you get stuck or need help with anything, just let us here at the Teahouse know. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 23:32, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your various responses. I am sure that there would be no real resistance to my article. The existing article in Wikipedia contains nothing of real interest. I am sure that it was written by somebody who has never met the subject (James F-L) and seems to know little about him. The first paragraph contains inaccurate and incomplete information. The second paragraph has two sentences, both totally inadequate. The third is misleading and again quite incomplete. The fourth paragraph (a single short sentence) is woefully incomplete. The final paragraph (just 7 words) is fairly meaningless and contains inaccurate information. The poor references, a mere two, lead me to suspect that the author(s) of this brief stub has(have) no knowledge of James F-L, who is in fact a world-renowned ornithologist. The biography which I have prepared is fully referenced and includes none of my own publications. In addition, I have listed all major publications by James F-L, as well as positions held by him at different times, awards, expeditions, and so on. It is a complete biography in which all facts can be verified very easily. Would it not be best if I replace the present article with my own, full article? Raptorchap (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Raptorchap the advice from Maproom in the second paragraph answers your question. It is likely that the authors of the article never did meet the subject, because Wikipedia articles tend to be written by people who did not know the subject personally. And what we know is less important than what we can find documented in independent reliable sources.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:05, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

cropped img d n display

I cropped the img File:IConji-cropped.jpg and it doesn't display (though it is visible as a file history thumb). This has happened before when I've cropped images (using jpegcrop) but not always; don't know why the diff. Can s.o. advise? Thanks. — kwami (talk) 03:52, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Kwamikagami hello and welcome to The Teahouse. I'm not familiar with this issue but Redrose64 helped me with an image problem once.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I tried downloading it, but only got 6100 bytes back, which is far too small. I suspect that the file was corrupted at some point. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Robert Naorem

The page of the biography article for Robert Naorem has been created but it's not been up on the wiki yet and it's not available on the search area . Why is that ? And it has reliable source n information .—–—– — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rk1985 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rk1985. You have been working on Draft:Robert Naorem, but have not yet submitted it for review. Please do not submit it at this time as it will not be accepted. The draft is full of promotional language, so please read about the neutral point of view and rewrite accordingly. I have highlighted examples of promotional language in bold in the following passages from your draft:

"a renowned designer, stylist and makeup artist in India."

"Psychologist by education & by passion turn into a renowned fashion designer HIS dedication towards promoting his region across the country & overseas. His path has only been upward since the launch of his career."

Also, your references are not formatted properly. Please read Referencing for beginners and format them correctly. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:55, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Rk1985. The technical reason it's not in the article mainspace is because it was created in the draft namespace and would have to be moved to the mainspace by someone (you could not do so because you are not yet autoconfirmed, i.e., you have not made more than ten edits edits and your account is not yet four days old). But if it was moved to the mainspace, I would expect and would support it being speedy deleted as blatant advertising. In short, it reads like a commercial for him, and very much not like a neutral encyclopedia article about him. It also is an article on a living person, with the enhanced expectations for citations to reliable sources that status requires, but it has very meager sourcing. Reliable sources that are secondary in nature and independent of the subject are also required to demonstrate notability. You might find reading Help:Referencing for beginners and Wikipedia:Your first article helpful. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:04, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Rk1985: after writing this I discovered the article was a copyright violation of the preexisting article on indpaedia, which does not appear to be a site with any type of free copyright license compatible with Wikipedia's licenses. I will also post a canned message about this to your talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit. Cannot a copyright violation of a Draft be handled short of deleting the page? Since it was in Draft space there is not as much urgency to delete the page. This template gives the creator 7-days to fix the page:

{{subst:copyvio|url=insert URL here}}

Then you can notify them on their Talk page. Blank the copyrighted text → set the template → notify the violator on their Talk page.

Regarding creating Drafts or Articles, I like you thought the user had to be autoconfirmed, but that is not the case: They only have to be registered. I tested it after I figured that one out

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 10:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Checkingfax. Copyright violations (and attack pages) are deleted immediately upon confirmation (or reverted to a non-infringing version and the history redacted, where relevant) in all namespaces. This is infringement; a violation of law that potentially exposes Wikipedia to liability. It is our obligation to delete these as fast as possible, with prejudice. We get many of these, though we don't catch nearly as many as we should, especially early on, because people do not prioritize it as the very first check on any article review process (where it should be in the triage).Because of the numbers involved, it is simply not possible for administrators, those who can delete and redact pages, to review each complex case or edge case requiring investigation, which is what the {{copyvio}} template is for.

That is, that template is not for blatant copyright violations but for potential infringements, not easy CSD G12 candidate (from the Copyvio template's documentation: if the page "is a blatant copyright violation, do not use this template"). The template is, rather, properly used for cases like intertwined infringement from multiple sources where separating it all out would be a huge undertaking; pages having many hallmarks of a copyyright violation but the source cannot be located; possible backwards copyvio but it's difficult to tell, etc.—cases that make a G12 tag or a revert to a prior version and tagging with {{copyvio-revdel}}, not possible to do in a reasonable time, not possible to determine at all, or beyond many user's knowledge to investigate.

Quite unlike other processes where a time window such as seven days is a feature, a sort of promise to all that the normal process length is some term, this template seven day window essentially functions as a warning that one week after posting, in the absence of action, the page may be deleted without further investigation but on the original tagging basis. But if we investigate and discover it is a blatant copyright infringement, we delete right away.

To answer your questions directly, no this cannot be handled in that way. This was a blatant copyright violation and needed to be deleted right way, for which the copyvio tag is unsuitable. We do not host known copyright violations.

Lastly, you're right that thinking you need to be autoconfirmed to create pages is a common mistake. I make plenty of mistakes! But this was not one. If you read my post again you'll see I was talking about autoconfirmation in relation to moving a page. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:46, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit. I am still not seeing why on a Draft you did not: Blank the copyrighted text → set the template → notify the violator on their Talk page. Then let things happen organically. Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 00:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what else I can say as I consider the above a rather complete explanation. Maybe TL;DR? To reiterate. We do not host illegal copyright violations for one second longer than is needed. They should be deleted immediately and in any namespace. The {{copyvio}} template is not intended for blatant copyright violations, which the page was, for which the template's documentation explicitly says it is inapplicable.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:35, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

There is an article with very bad formulation that has many problems. Wiki does not allow me to correct it.

I am new at Wiki but a little better doing things online than some of my friends. The article I was trying to fix, has some really long and unclear sentences because the person who wrote it is from Czech Republic. In fact there are three error messages on the page:

[hide]This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.
      This article has an unclear citation style. (February 2014)
      This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. (February 2014)

The person who is 'supervising" the changes, first thought i was vandalizing since I was deleting things and rewriting a lot of stuff. He became super suspicious when I said that I was making the changes for a friend who can't do it herself (not good with online work) then he came up with the conflict of interest issue. finally, having worked throughout the whole night and him reverting my changes over and over again, at 6am, I went through every sentence,carefully changed them so that I would not delete any content but really reformulate the grammar or put the sentence in more English way. I also tried to be more careful with explaining the changes. So now lo and behold, the article is reverted! I understand and appreciate controlling and making sure nobody is misusing or abusing this. I have tried in every step to comply and sent him examples of really bad sentences, but he just goes and reverts it. I think that this is now gone beyond control and have become a bully, just because he can. ... He is just blocking it although the sentences are super ridiculously incorrect! what would you do?SilviaNikoletti (talk) 01:42, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I see two related problems. First, you made massive changes without discussing them on the article talk page. Then, when your changes were reverted, you made massive changes again, without discussing on the article page, which is edit-warring. This is fundamentally a content dispute, but it is complicated by your failure to discuss. Go to the article talk page, Talk:Celeste Buckingham and discuss your changes. Also, read the dispute resolution policy. If discussion is inconclusive, follow one of the procedures described in the policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)The article was written by a variety of people, and where any of the authors are from doesn't matter.

In several places, you removed reliably sourced information, sometimes claiming that you were adding information (as was the case here) -- that is extremely suspicious and does appear extremely dishonest.

Your behavior is similar the WP:COI editor ArtistsplazaUSA. Plus, you admit that you are making the changes "on behalf of Celeste Buckingham", so that means you are editing with a conflict of interest.

When you tried to add material instead of removing it, you didn't cite any reliable sources, you altered reliably sourced information to statements unsupported by the sources (including altering quotes).

All we do here is neutrally summarize professionally published mainstream academic and journalistic sources, with no addition, elaboration, or interpretation. We're not a PR forum or fan site. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Article rejection

Is there anyone who could help with an Article that I'm having difficulty creating? Specifically, ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kirby_Allen_(Pittman) ) is an article about a person who was responsible for promotion of a musical artist. The work of Chaino is fairly well documented and that documentation usually credits Kirby Allen . My difficulty is in providing acceptable documentation for Allen. Curley Wolf (talk) 04:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Station map related

Hi, i wanted to ask about how to add a railway mhgvap in station infobox. Before adding, i had made a template for the station, to which i deleted as per G7 criteria. The map sample can be found here. No matter i added many times, but it had shown me errors. Need a guidance. SuperHero ● 👊 ● ★ 06:30, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

blip

how do i edit my own sandbox? (Marrissa111 (talk) 06:43, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello Marrissa111 and welcome to the Teahouse. Go to User:Marrissa111/sandbox and click "Edit" in the top right corner. It seems to me that you have already managed to edit it before, so congratulations! – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:45, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Evisu,

Hi, I wonder why my editing on EVISU wiki content doesnt show up to public?

Thanks, LU Ohyeahcrowdlu (talk) 04:05, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ohyeahcrowdlu, welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits aren't showing up because they were reverted by another user. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project, and that means that sometimes, its contributors disagree on the way forward. Don't feel discouraged if your first contributions are reverted—treat it as part of the learning experience. If you feel that you are right, discuss it with the user by going to their talk page. The user who reverted your edit, Majora (talk · contribs), did so because they felt that your edit added content that was too promotional in nature—Wikipedia is not a means of promoting. Content on Wikipedia should be expressed from a neutral point of view and should refer to a variety of reliable sources that verify its content. With this in mind, try rewriting your edit, referring primarily to factual statements supported by reliable sources. If you have any questions, feel free to ask at this Teahouse. Best of luck, Mz7 (talk) 04:32, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Ohyeahcrowdlu, do you work for Evisu? If so, please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. —teb728 t c 06:47, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Robert Naorem

How can I draft a new biography article . And please help me the format of writing a references along with the retrieved dates . And how to send the article for review ? As new here needed help & support from experienced editors . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rk1985 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

You have asked twice - I think this question is answered above, in the heading #Instead of giving sometime to the correction why delete. Once you have reviewed the information there, if you have specific questions then please ask again.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:32, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Impersonator

I'm not sure whether this is the right place to raise my issue. Tafeax 2 had a username which 99% identical to my username. His edits mostly from mobile phone and tend to vandals Wiki by adding unverified information. Is this considered WP:IMPERSONATOR? I'm afraid admin have a thought that I have two accounts. -- Tafeax (talk) 08:57, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

@Tafeax: Yes it is. I'd recommend reporting them as a username violation at WP:UAA. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:36, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

replace a stub with a "go to" reference?

Two expressions are historically linked: instrumental action and value-rational action. I am revising the instrumental action article in a way that includes value-rational action. I think it makes sense to eliminate the old stub for the latter, but still want readers to know how to find that subject. If I eliminate the stub, how could that expression be found? Thanks.TBR-qed (talk) 15:09, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

By replacing the stub with a redirect. Maproom (talk) 15:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Creating new article

I have a draft of an article in my homepage. It needs a bit more work, but when done, I would like to make it a regular article. How can I move the contents, references, et. al.? Is there a way of just linking the current page to the Article namespace? Thanks.Suredev (talk) 21:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Suredev hello and welcome to The Teahouse. When the article is ready, you would move it. I'm not certain where the move tab is for you, and I would advise you to wait until someone else has given the draft a look. For me the move tab is at the top of the page to the right of "history", but for you I think there is the word "more" instead and you would get a list of actions, which I believe includes "move".

Regarding User:Suredev/Sheila Stewart (Author), it looks like a good effort to me, but I would be too quick to accept articles, so I don't review them. You would move the link above "References" under "External links", which you would add this way: ==External links==. And you would move the descriptive text to the right and enclose the entire line between brackets [...].

Also, I don't think you would use the second line where you say the article relies heavily on those sources.

And references go after punctuation, not before, but that's just our preference. And everything in the article should be referenced at this stage.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:47, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I read up on hints to a newbie (suggested by one of the experts here) and learnt about the move tab. I will move it when it is ready and passes muster. I have removed the blog reference all together -- I did get some feedback on that -- and instead substituted a more robust doctoral thesis.

As for the referece to the newspaper obits, I will wait for more feedback. I do not mind getting rid of it, but the truth is that all my knowledge of Sheila Stewart comes from the obits and Jo Parnell's blog! Unfortunately, her memoir is out of print and not easy to get -- I have just placed an interlibrary request and hope to have it in a fortnight. I intend to do some more work on the draft before moving it. In this way I can incorporate the suggestions.Suredev (talk) 22:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I have moved it from your sandbox to Draft:Sheila Stewart (author). In my view, it is good enough for an article already – but it might be best to leave it as a draft for a day or two, and while it's a draft I will try to make some minor improvements to it. (I had hoped that making it into a draft would cause a "Submit" button to appear on it. It didn't. I find it odd that clueless new users can easily summon up "Submit" buttons, and use them freely to submit pages of garbage, whereas the very competent Suredev, and I who have been editing for years, can't figure out how to get hold of one.) Maproom (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Maproom: Thanks for the kind words! No, I am most defintely NOT competent. But, I intend to get there. Look at my reply to Vchimpanzee above; I intend to let the draft brew for a few weeks as I think that I may have more descriptive material after I have read the memoir. Thanks.Suredev (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

That's fine. Wikipedia has no deadline. But I've seen a lot of first-time article submissions, and I can confidently assure you . . . Maproom (talk) 22:51, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

When you're ready to submit it for review, Suredev, simply insert {{subst:submit}} in the top of the article. --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

I think it's ready to be moved now so I am going to be bold and do so.--ukexpat (talk) 03:24, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Done - shiny new article at Sheila Stewart (author).--ukexpat (talk) 03:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I will be adding some other things (not large!) in the coming weeks. I need to track down the reference to the BBC Radio play that she wrote and her memoir should yield some interesting information.

In any case, thanks to all of you. Suredev (talk) 15:28, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Not notable?

My draft for the dutch band Draft:Julius_(band) got declined because of notability, but I don't really understand why. I've included references to dutch mainstream radiostations and the dutch billboard. I see other dutch bands on Wikipedia with only one or two references, and some of those references seem to be less notable then what I have provided.

I would like to know why Julius isn't notable enough, and what I can do.

Thanks in advance! Iris Bloem (talk) 10:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

No-one has said that the band Julius is not notable. But three reviewers have said that the draft does not include references that establish its notability. If you believe otherwise, can you please tell us (as many of us can't read Dutch) which of the current references do establish its notability? They must be to reliable independent published sources which contain significant discussion of the band. Maproom (talk) 11:12, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, Maproom.

http://www.janbletz.nl/julius-plezierige-powerpop-van-nederlandse-bodem/ (julius enjoyable powerpop from dutch soil) An interview with the lead singer done by journalist Jan Bletz

http://www.maxazine.nl/2014/09/30/nederlandse-popband-julius-gaat-internationaal/ (dutch popband julius goes international) Maxazine is an independent magazine aimed towards music.

http://www.nporadio2.nl/nieuws/6386/radio-2-talent-julius NPO radio 2 (dutch public broadcasting radio 2) item on Julius becoming a Radio 2 talent with their single Give it Up.

http://www.3fm.nl/serioustalent/artiesten/detail/359075/JULIUS NPO (dutch public broadcasting radio 3) item on Julius becoming a NPO 3FM Serious Talent with their single Back to the Days.

http://www.kro-ncrv.nl/helemaalhaandrikman/seizoenen/helemaal-haandrikman-2015/30-140374-08-09-2015/290-103627-julius-vanavond-in-ziggo-dome-als-aftershow-u2 (julius tonight in ziggo dome as aftershow U2) KRO-NCRV is part of the dutch public broadcasting. This is a radio interview with lead singer Koen Brouwer about playing the aftershow for U2 in the Ziggo Dome.

And I've recently added the two following links to the article: http://www.noordhollandsdagblad.nl/stadstreek/alkmaar/article27563572.ece/Erik-Meereboer-over-Popronde-Alkmaar-Het-is-gaan-met-die-banaan_ Noordhollands Dagblad is a local newspaper with an interview with guitarist Erik Meereboer.

http://www.gitarist.nl/nieuws/artikel/2-14000/julius-in-china-21-shows-in-vijf-dagen (julius in china 21 shows in 5 days) Gitarist is a monthly magazine, with an interview with guitarist Erik Meereboer.

These are independent and published sources that are about the band. I hope my explanation helps. Thanks in advance! Iris Bloem (talk) 12:02, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Iris Bloem. Four of these are interviews, and so are not independent, and so do not contribute to notability at all. The other three are all the right sort of thing, but they are all rather short. You have not established that anybody has yet taken enough note of Julius to write at length about them. If you can find a substantial and independent article, that, together with these, would do it. At present I think it is borderline.

By the way, pointing at other articles is never an argument of any weight in Wikipedia: see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Unfortunately many of our five million articles are substandard: the thing to do is to improve them (or delete them if they can't be improved), not to add other articles at the same poor level. --ColinFine (talk) 13:12, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

ColinFine "Four of these are interviews, and so are not independent, and so do not contribute to notability at all". This is not necessarily correct. For instance, if Rolling Stone run an interview, they do not print the entire transcript verbatim; they will pick and choose what parts to print and exercise editorial judgement independently of the subject. Furthermore, they limit interviews to a select group they think will attract attention to the journal. Therefore they are "reliable" in that they can generally be trusted to be factually accurate, and notable because the text printed was created spontaneously and independently by a third party that the article's subject had no control over. I seem to recall a significant amount of citations for our article on the album Something/Anything? were interviews directly conducted with Todd Rundgren; yet these did not stop the article from being awarded good article status. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:33, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine. Thank you for explaining. I now know what I need to do to improve my article and will keep working on it. Iris Bloem (talk) 13:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Iris Bloem, I see that Draft:Julius (band) appears to have had a duplicate of it created at Julius (band) which another editor tagged for speedy deletion. I declined the deletion request as the article claims the band has supported U2, which is a reasonably significant claim for a band. Drmies may be able to assist further with reading Dutch sources (see Rubberen Robbie). Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Ritchie333! The new page got created after translating the Dutch version. The Dutch page is currently under consideration as I hadn't added the discography and record label info yet, which I've now added, so hopefully that shall be sorted soon. I've just found this item from their label with mention of their support show for U2 concerts, which is unfortunately once again in Dutch :) http://www.innercoremusic.nl/?p=1157

I'd be very greatful if anyone can help me sort this thing out! I'm still very new to editing. Thanks in advance! Iris Bloem (talk) 15:45, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

article declined

hello, I am writing as I would like to know why the article I posted was declined. Do you think you could provide some tips? LTarquino1975 (talk) 15:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, your submission was declined because it did not adequately show the subject's notability, in fact it had no references at all. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject to show notability. The article draft is here Draft:Julio Perez Sanz Theroadislong (talk) 16:01, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

You can find sources in newspapers, magazines and the like if your subject is notable. :) Google's newspaper archives are a good place to search, and most of what you find there is considered reliable. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 16:15, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

inline web links

In Terrence Mallick there is a link to the IMDb page for the film The Unforeseen which appears to the reader thus: The Unforeseen, looking like a Wikilink when in reality it is a direct link to an external website but is not followed by the usual arrow. This seems to be a deception, unless it is the intention to "absorb" IMDb into Wikipedia? If not does anyone recommend that this link be changed into the more usual inline citation, or should I just leave it be? Jodosma (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

This has now been corrected (VC beat me to it). The external link was to the wrong IMDb title anyway. Dbfirs 19:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

It was actually done on more than one film. It seems the usual method is to either have red links, as there are now, or no links. But I would assume these films are notable and just don't have an article yet.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 19:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

in line citations and referencing footnotes

Hello- I have submitted an article that needs cleaning up before being accepted. I have edited a page once before, but am unsure how to really set up the links correctly or reference the footnotes. I went in and used the link tool for in-line ciations (although when I look at the draft they do not look right- they look like web addresses rather than hypertext....) Could use some advice about that. Also, I'd like to reference articles/ footnotes I've included correctly. Can anyone please advise me on how to do that correctly. Thanks! NeuroproteXeon (talk) 16:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

There's no need to embolden headings. An inline reference (citation) relates to the facts stated in the article and should immediately follow the sentence it backs up. Use "<ref>" tags for these (see your first example that needs moving to the sentence it backs up). The numbering is automatic. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for details. General references should be separate. Dbfirs 19:27, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

There is a problem with your username because it appears to relate to a commercial product. See Wikipedia:Username_policy#Promotional names for guidance. I think you might have to change your name. See Wikipedia:Changing username, or you might prefer to just forget about the promotional name and create a new account. If you mention on your new talk page that you unintentionally used a promotional name for your first edits, you will not be blamed for this mistake. Dbfirs 19:34, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Another mistake you made is that you prematurely created the article rather than improving the draft and resubmitting. If you fix the article quickly, you might be allowed that error. Dbfirs 19:44, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

You ought to immediately declare your conflict of interest on your user page, and also be very careful to avoid any promotional language. You should also check that you have not copied any material that is copyright. Dbfirs 20:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

(ec) Hello NeuroproteXeon and welcome to The Teahouse.

See WP:COI to learn everything required of you because of your conflict of interest.

The most important template for you is the one below. If you list everything that can be included in the following, with last being the author's last name and first being the author's first name, you would put that between <ref> and </ref> immediately after the information for which the source is used. For more than one author, use last1, last2, etc. instead of just last, and first1, first2, etc. {{cite journal | last = | first = | last2 = | first2 = | date = | title = | url = | journal = | publisher = | volume = | issue = | pages = | bibcode = | doi = | access-date= }} — Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:23, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

The article about your company is in danger of deletion because you have not included references where the company has been written about in WP:Reliable sources. You need to add these urgently, if they exist, to establish WP:notability. Dbfirs 21:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Dbfirs- I changed my username (originally used name of project, my first time doing this). I think I originally submitted a draft, but then deleted it.? Will re-work summary to not use copyrighted material. Any suggestions about re-formatting to make this work? Trying to link this local company, research/ technology, but may not meet notability criteria. Maybe retitle?

NeuroproteXeon (talk) 22:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macbflo (talk • contribs)

Dbfirs- Also, I don't really know how to start a conversation on my talk page.

NeuroproteXeon (talk) 22:13, 26 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macbflo (talk • contribs)

I'll reply there. By the way, you can just sign your comments with four tildes like this: ~~~~ immediately after your last sentence. We are happy with your new identity. Dbfirs 22:22, 26 February 2016 (UTC)