Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 625

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 620

←

Archive 623

→

If a page is unprotected , how can I make it semi-protected?

The page Dhaka should be semi-protected as far as I think.Wholecube (talk) 08:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Wholecube. You can ask at Requests for page protection. Follow the instructions, and provide good reasons for the request.

By the way, please do NOT include signatures in section headers. I have removed this one. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 09:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wholecube Do you have any references for your removal of pronunciation from that article? Dbfirs 09:34, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Wholecube, After a quick look at Dhaka, I don't see the level of vandalism or other problems that woulds warrant semi-protection, but I only took a brief look and perhaps I missed something. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 10:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes sir I have references as I removed some pronunciations.

I removed pronunciations i Dhaka, because as a Bangladeshi , I can tell that the pronunciations were wrong. Thank you sir .Wholecube (talk) 14:06, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I understand your thinking, but please note that this is the English Wikipedia, so the pronunciation should reflect how the place is pronounced in other English-speaking countries. Dbfirs 14:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

"please do NOT include signatures in section headers."-I did not understand it , please help.Wholecube (talk) 14:07, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

In these two edits you signed twice, once in the heading and again after the question. Only the signature after the question is appropriate. Dbfirs 20:15, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

How do I seek review of improved page of Donald Yates to avoid deletion scheduled Monday, June 12, 2017?

The page for Donald Yates had been scheduled for deletion Monday, Jun 12, 2017, because an editor said the biography was unsourced and the lengthy list of publications listed included pieces in vanity presses.

I copyedited and improved the biography section with sourced references and links as well as eliminated the publications list, which contained books published by McFarland and Co. as well as articles in peer-reviewed journals, as well as others.

Although I'm still learning how to create an accurate publications list and "See also" section, I would like the deletion decision rescinded based on my improvements.

And some guidance regarding the "See also" and publications sections. Thank you so much.Nightdesk (talk) 22:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Nightdesk. Please read the message at the top of Donald Yates carefully. Since you have improved the article, you can remove the proposed deletion yourself. Please be aware that someone may take it to Articles for Deletion, and that an earlier version of this biography was deleted in 2013. You can read that debate at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Panther-Yates. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:02, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

User Name/Neutrality

Hello,

I have created articles relating to two notable musicians in Cameroon and their discographies. I use neutral language, no hyperbole, and credible sources. Because I work with them, my neutrality was questioned, understandably. I have learned from feedback and editors how to write about them in a neutral fashion, make sure to use the right type of sources, etc. I was told to change my user name to disclose my role at the record label, which I did. Now an editor said I should not use this user name because it shows indicates a conflict of interest. What is appropriate? I want to do whatever is deemed most appropriate. Thank you very much for your help. Rachel Burks of New Bell Music (talk) 01:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Rachel Burks of New Bell Music: You should either keep your username the way it is or rename to "Rachel Burks". Do not use the name "New Bell Music" for the reasons explained on your talk page. Either way, you should disclose your conflict of interest on your userpage (which you already have) and avoid editing in areas which you have a conflict of interest in except in cases of gross errors which any reasonable editor would correct. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 01:42, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so so much for the advice. It is very much appreciated! Request to change name is submitted. Rachel Burks of New Bell Music (talk) 02:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

You're welcome. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 02:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Book Creator keeps clearing all my entries!

I just joined the Wikipedia community today and I am having a heck of a time creating my first successful book. I do not know why it keeps clearing out all my hours of hard work! I clicked on Save in the lower right corner of the Book Creator screen part way through so the stupid thing wouldn't crap out on me again like it already had twice. So just like with any other computer document that you save as you go along, my book I am creating has a name and I regularly click the Save button and choose to override the already saved book with the latest version thinking that all was working like it should. But now I get back home after being away from the computer for 3 hrs and the Book Creator was wiped clean but still turned on because it displayed 0 pages in book at the top of the screen! WTH???? So then I click on my user name at the top of my screen to go to my page and hopefully view my previously saved version but instead I get some messed up error messages about that user page not being created. I just created an account less than 8 hrs ago!!! So since my book does not show on that page, I go a waste of time round about way to find it and it shows up and so I click on it to edit it further because I AM NOT DONE YET!! But now while all the pages are still there, the title and subtitle have been erased. WHY??? According to everything I read on here before I created an account, it is NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THIS DIFFICULT TO CREATE A FREAKING BOOK! KarlderGrosse843 (talk) 01:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, KarlderGrosse843. Is this the book you are talking about?User:KarlderGrosse843/Books/July 2017 Europe Trip

To find your past contributions, just click the "Contributions" tab at the top of your screen when logged in. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hot political pages need special rules

We all are aware that at this time there is a great political divide in the country. We are aware that there have been many media outlets that have taken liberty with the truth on both sides, and even someone like James Comey stated under oath outright that the New York Times fabricated a story. So the issue covers all people in all media outlets on all sides and we are definitely in a very new paradigm as a country now as far as information is concerned. That is undeniable.

Pages that deal with Donald Trump or James Comey or Hillary's email scandal any member of the current administration NEED TO STICK TO COLD, OFTEN BORING, BUT NEVER ANONYMOUSL-SOURCED FACTS! Wikipedia MUST NOT become a biased player in this by committing itself SOLELY to facts that are not refutable, not because you or someone else BELIEVE them to be irrefutable simply because the Times or Post published them; not because one side or another or one newspaper or another is more legitimate in your view than another, but because the facts are indisputable. Let me explain.

That the Russians meddled in our election is not irrefutable, because no evidence has been put forth yet to the public to prove it. We have the words of Intel officials, three of whom were Democrat appointees who simply got signoffs from the others. Same with the Flynn matter. Now they may be telling the truth; the Russians may have affected our election in some manner or have attempted to do so or the Russians may have had some other interaction in someway that has been different from theusual 24/7 cyberattacks that we launch and the Chinese launch nonstop.

But if there is no dulicumentary proof, it should stay out of Wikipedia

So: For all matters dealing with the administration and the election, and ALL personalities regardless of their party, I demand that a unique set of Wikipedia rules apply given that there has been nothing like this in American history and the sides are so completely and bitterly opposed to each other.

No more anonymously sourced "news" should be permitted in Wikipedia REGARDLESS of the supposed legitimacy of the newspaper or other media source.

I ask all editors to respect this very fair rule given the fact that the current political climate is unlike any other in the past and cognizant that a special, new set of rules are needed right now so the Wikipedia does not inadvertently become a partisan player in this maelstrom.

- Gideon Marx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.115.39 (talk) 01:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Gideon Marx. The Teahouse is not a place to advocate policy changes on Wikipedia. We do not make policy here. Our purpose here is to answer questions from new editors about how to edit Wikipedia. A better place would be Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). I will comment that we have been dealing with highly controversial topics including war, terrorism, genocide and the bitterest nationalistic and religious disputes for 16 years. We have very well established procedures for dealing with such controversies. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am sorry, IP editor, but no. Wikipedia already has somewhat special rules which apply to such pages: Discretionary sanctions. Beyond those, however, if a source is good enough for The New York Times, or for Fox News, it is generally good enough for Wikipedia. Wikipedia depends on the editorial judgement and reliability of major news outlets and other sources. It addresses posisble bias by using multiple and diverse sources whenever possible. It does not impose its own rules on how reporting is done, or refuse to take note of stories that do not fit such rules. To do so would be to fly in the face of a core policy here verifibility. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 03:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

In need of a quick review of the Draft I created after making Necessary changes.

Hi English Wikipedia help Channel. I have posted an article it's name is "Draft: Taal Inc." 2-3 weeks ago. I waiting someone to review it as it has already been reviewed before twice, necessary corrections have been made. I am looking forward for some to read it and help me before it gets deleted by Wikipedians. Is that possible? I request, not to delete the page. Tell me the necessary ramifications I'll make changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddy sj (talk • contribs) 05:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Do you understand the need to establish that the subject is notable? Draft: Taal Inc. cites over 50 sources, but none of the ones I have checked even mentions the subject. Maproom (talk) 07:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How do i make my travel company page?

I want to make wiki page for my company My Flight Trip ? How do i make it please guide me.Jasbirsrathore1984 (talk) 07:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Jasbirsrathore1984, and welcome to the Teahouse. You should not, because you have a conflict of interest. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:55, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jasbirsrathore1984: (edit conflict) Hello and welcome. It is highly advised that you should not directly create a page about your company. That is what is called a conflict of interest. It means that, no matter your intentions, you are probably too close to your company to write objectively about it.

What many users don't realize is that Wikipedia is a different kind of website from social media; it is not a place like Facebook for every company to get a page. Wikipedia is more selective about its content; it wants article subjects to be shown to be notable with independent reliable sources, that is, what other people who don't work for your company say about it.

If you do have independent reliable sources, there may be ways for you to indirectly create a page about it. You can make a request at Requested articles that someone else write about it, or you can visit Articles for Creation where you can write a draft and them submit it for review before it is posted- however if you don't have independent reliable sources and the page is written as an advertisement, it will be rejected quickly. Those are really the only two ways you can see a page created about your company. I hope this helps you. 331dot (talk) 07:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I would add that a Wikipedia page about your company isn't necessarily a good thing. It can be edited by anyone and no one, even you, gets to control what appears on the page. If negative information about your company is published in an independent reliable source, it can be added to the page about your company and you can't keep it off just because it is negative. 331dot (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Finding stubs to edit

Hi all, I participated in a Wikipedia class editing project last year and really loved it, so I want to get into editing a little more. While I would love to start with correcting small issues in articles, it's difficult to find those. I was wondering if there's anywhere I could find a list of stubs/incomplete articles/articles with noted issues so I can target my efforts effectively. Thanks in advance! RDvor (talk) 06:02, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, RDvor, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can find articles in need of help here: Wikipedia:Community portal, including stubs. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:07, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(ec) Hello @RDvor:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Lists of stub types per topic area, incl. links to these stub categories, are maintained at WP:Stubs. Other types of maintenance are also often covered by specific Wikipedia projects (f.e. copy-editing, disambiguation, categorization, anti-vandal and anti-spam activities, and lots more). Depending on your interests, I recommend to join such a Wiki project for additional ressources and advice from like-minded editors. A quick additional tip: if you are looking for information about a specific Wikipedia-related topic, you can type "WP:topic" in the search field. Usually such keywords are linked to an information or guideline in the "Wikipedia" namespace with additional details and links. Hope that helps. GermanJoe (talk) 08:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How to Improve Credibility

Hi,

I hope some of you can help me.

I am an experienced writer/ editor but relatively new to Wikipedia. I have started making small edits but I would like to develop this to the point where I am helping other editors and possibly overseeing other edits.

Can any of you advise me on whether this is possible and if so, the best way to build my profile to get to that level?

Many thanks,

StephStephRJ (talk) 08:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi StephRJ, welcome to Wikipedia. It's great that you want to help out new editors, and there are a number of ways you can do so, depending on your preferred areas of expertise. Ultimately, we judge people on the strength of their contributions, so if you keep making positive additions to the encyclopedia, you'll quickly become a trusted member of the community.

As a writer, you're presumably fairly proficient with language, so you may want to join up with the Guild of Copy Editors to provide assistance with language and grammar in other users' articles.

If you want to prevent vandalism, this will help you get started.

There are plenty of backlogs which are full of articles in need of attention.

You may also want to look through the community to-do list for ideas of areas that need some attention.

Hopefully this gives you a couple of ideas for moving forward. All the best, Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:16, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

How do I ask a third party/volunteer to write an article for my company?

I read a lot of content on how to create a page and write an article for your company on wikipedia but all the content is very scary and tells me to not create a page myself, but to submit a request and let someone else write it. Because if I write content for my company myself then it may be biased and I will have a vested interest in it, so let a third person do it who is neutral to the company. How do I submit a request for a volunteer or writer to write an article for my company and where do I submit it?

180.151.8.130 (talk) 06:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You can visit Requested Articles to post a request that others write about your company. You should be aware that since Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, it may not be done quickly. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

To add to what 331dot said: Requested Articles is indeed the proper place for such a request; but there is a very long backlog there, and no guarantee that anybody will pick it up. An alternative approach is to look through the List of WikiProjects and see if there is an active project relevant to your company. If so, asking for help on the Talk page of that project might be more productive. There is also some useful research you can do: please understand that a Wikipedia article should be based almost entirely on what people who have no connection with the subject have published about it: what the subject says or wants to say is of very little interest to Wikipedia. This means that anybody who does write an article about your company will need to find several independent, reliably published sources which talk at length about the company. Nothing published by the company will be relevant, and nor will anything based on an interview or press release from the company. Nor will mere listings in directories. If you can find several good sources and mention them in your request, it may make the request that much more attractive for an uninvolved editor to pick up. On the other hand, if you cannot find such sources, this is a good indication that your company is not at present notable (in the sense that Wikipedia used the word), and so it is not worth you or anybody else spending time on an article. --ColinFine (talk) 10:26, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

is Wikipedia considered as a social media?

Wikipedia is an inforation business,although Wikipedia is considered as social media by some sources,Wikipedia is actually about information sharing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.250.241.7 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the question. Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia. It is emphatically not a social media site. Yunshui ^雲 _水 14:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

While Yunshui rightly points out that the aim of Wikipedia is not to be a social media, de facto it is a place where people with somewhat common interests discuss and share content, even though discussions should remain germane to the goal of improving the encyclopedia. Said otherwise, while you may make friends here, that is not the goal.

In the future, you should use the Teahouse (and the similar Help Desk) for questions relating to editing Wikipedia; questions about the outside perception of Wikipedia or other subjects should go to the suitable Reference Desk. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:50, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, to the OP, you said that Wikipedia is an information business. Just want to be clear that isn't correct. It's not a business, its a non-profit institution similar to the open source movement in software development where people contribute things for the satisfaction of the work and the experience of working collaboratively with a great community, not for monetary gain. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 02:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:NOTFACEBOOK. It is definitely not a social media. 62.109.16.184 (talk) 13:58, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Well WP:NOT is a little... misleading to say the least. Many things that "Wikipedia is not" it actually is. It is simply these things incidentally. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:53, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

Merger of previous accounts I've forgotten the passwords to and didn't associate an e-mail address with.

Not an important question, but I have created user accounts on wikipedia before, and all three times forgot the password (so can't use them any more). Is it possible to merge them with my current account? It doesn't matter really, but if it was possible it would be useful for me to keep track of what I'd edited and written in the past. Also, if I make the same mistakes in different places it might be easier for someone to spot the pattern and tell me/fix it/them. The three usernames were: Thankyoubloke, Chessbloke, and Tabloke. You can see I used all three to create and then edit ChessGenius for example. Anyway, just thought I'd ask. Thanks very much. Imnikrist (talk) 12:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Imnikrist, and welcome to the Teahouse. There is no way to properly merge them. You can, of course, keep track of your edits under those usernames by accessing:

You can also turn your old user pages and user talk pages into redirects that point to your current user and talk page. That way people will know whom to contact regarding edits made from those accounts. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:30, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Finnusertop. That's very helpful. I'll try and do redirects. Is there are username redirect template or anything? Thanks again. Imnikrist (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

There is {{Former account}} and some others at Category:Alternative Wikipedia account templates, but they look a bit clumsy. I'd simply put a redirect on your old user pages and user talk pages, as you have done at User:Thankyoubloke. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Claiming a redirect to create a new page

Hello I work for a registered charity in the UK (The Officers' Association) and have joined Wikipedia in order to create a wiki page to represent our organisation. When I search for "Officers' Association" there is a redirect in place that points to the Royal British Legion (RBL) - Another much larger UK charity who we work closely with. As you can see from their page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Royal_British_Legion) it lists the Officers' Association as one of the merged organisations that formed the RBL - This is factually inaccurate.

Can you recommend the best course of action to create this page and remove this redirect? We have a good relationship with the RBL so I could approach them but would like advice on what I should be requesting first.

Many thanks

James

Officersassoc (talk) 11:31, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Officersassoc. Well first you should register a new account since your current one is a violation of our username policy since it appears to be promotional and implies shared use. Nearly anything will do just fine, including "James at OA" or just literally gibberish.

Second, you should carefully review our policies on conflicts of interest and take care to abide by them, since failure to do so can result in a lot of unwanted attention.

Finally, if you would like to attempt to write the article yourself, and you're pretty sure it meets our standards for notability, you should start it as a draft, which can be done by clicking here -> Draft:The Officers' Association. When you think you're nearly finished, you can submit it to our Articles for Creation project where a volunteer can review it and offer feedback.

You probably also want to check out our tutorial on writing your first article, or consider taking our interactive tutorial at The Wikipedia Adventure. There's a pretty big learning curve in writing for an encyclopedia, and these can save a lot of trouble if get a feel for things first rather than jumping right in. TimothyJosephWood 12:43, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

One more thing, Officersassoc, to add to what TimothyJosephWood says: No Wikipedia article "represents" an organisation, other than Wikipedia. If Wikipedia has an article about your organisation, it will not "represent" your organisation, it will not be owned by your organisation, and your organisation will not have control of its contents. It is basically not your job to write a Wikipedia article about your organisation, because you are likely to find it hard to judge what is and what isn't promotional. This is why editing with a conflict of interest is discouraged. My recommendation would be to drop the idea, and (if you want to contribute to Wikipedia) find other articles to work on. But if you choose to continue, follow TJW's advice. --ColinFine (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

I have created a stub here, since the redirect is wrong. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

Bullying in Wikipedia by Senior editor

Hello sir, i want to know how to get Help from the administrator or supereditors when someone get bullied by senior editor in wikipedia. Constantly removing & reverting the contribution(constructive hard-work) of new user in a targeted manner, and discourages the new users in wikipedia world. Thank you --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 06:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi WikiBodhiVamsa and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't examined the disagreement in detail, but I see no bullying, only an insult by you, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. If you have a disagreement on content, please discuss it politely on the talk page of the article without making any accusations. I'm not an administrator or "supereditor", just an ordinary editor like you, and we are all equal here, but we all have to learn the rules of Wikipedia about use of sources. If a polite discussion does not result in an agreement, then you can ask for a Wikipedia:Third opinion. Dbfirs 06:44, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi again WikiBodhiVamsa I don't think accusing people of Communist bias is helpful to Wikipedia. Could I just clarify that a content dispute is best discussed on the talk page of the article (in this case Talk:Godhra_train_burning where another editor has already started a discussion). Repeatedly adding disputed content is considered disruptive and is not the way we do things on Wikipedia. Please follow procedure. You might find the essay Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle helpful. Dbfirs 08:38, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Dbfirs, i think you didn't read my reply correctly in Talk page. I said this is my personal opinion sir, and i ask this in very polite manner. i think i have rights & freedom to speak to other user like You. It was decent conversation. But why are you hackling me here.? is this your 2nd account(Tyler Durden) please let me know. Thank you. --WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 12:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi again WikiBodhiVamsa. I'm disappointed that you ignored my advice. I was trying to help you to avoid getting blocked but I see that you are determined to continue with your war against other editors and I wish to have no more to do with you. Please do not continue any correspondence with me. I have no interest in the article and I wish to avoid any more ridiculous accusations. I have withdrawn my comment above since you think I misunderstood. I get the impression that there is something more going on here, but I have no evidence so I will not comment further. Dbfirs 12:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Dear sir @Dbfirs, i am worried. i don't know what makes you think i am attacks other user. This is very polite and decent conversation. but instead i am sacred using Wikipedia. This is no longer Open source and Free space of knowledge. where other voice & opinion are being suppressed by other user. This is not jimmy wales dream. Sorry if i hurts you. Thank you WikiBodhiVamsa (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Please do not communicate with me any further. I suspect that all is not as it seems. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a free space for anyone to write what they wish. There are many open sites where opinion can be expressed if this is what you are looking for. Dbfirs 13:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Uploading a profile picture for one magazine I work for, creating an entire page for another

Dear Wiki Users,

I am an editorial assistant working for The Magazine ANTIQUES (TMA) and MODERN Magazine (MM). I have two questions:

1. I noticed that TMA doesn't have a header image and I was going to add one. We have the rights to use whatever was on our covers, so I was going to upload our May-June cover. However, since it's the company and not I who specifically owns the copyright, is it ok for me to upload it using my user account?

2. MM has no page. Is it conflict of interest for me to create it, using just basic info (publisher, editor, owner, basic history)?

The magazines have been around for, respectively, 95 and 9 years. I've been working for them for a little over a year.

Thank you. Samg0DD^m (talk) 18:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

(2) Yes, since you work for them it is a conflict of interest not only to create the page but to work on it at all. See the guideance at WP:COI. (1) The image must be released under a free licence that allows for re-use. RudolfRed (talk) 19:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, RudolfRed.

Samg0DD^m (talk) 19:19, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Samg0DD^m you not only have a conflict of interest, you are a paid contributor. You must disclose this in accordance with the instructions at WP:PAID.

When RudolfRed says the image must be released under a free license, that is correct, but you cannot release it. The copyright holder must release it. Once it is released, anyone in the world will be able to display it, sell it, create modified versions of it, or muse it in pretty much any way at all, provided that the source is attributed. See the details at Donating copyrighted material. Oh your employer having the "rights to use" an image would not be sufficient, the actual copyright holder must consent to the release.

Once you disclose your connection, you could use the article wizard to create a draft, under the articles for creation project, which will need to be reviewed and approved by an experienced editor before it goes live. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:47, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, DES. I've learned a lot. Will try to familiarize myself with the procedure before attempting anything else. Samg0DD^m (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

|The image could be uploaded under fair use exceptions,provided it meets Wikipedia's requirements see WP:FAIRUSE. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:41, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

Where do I find a list of all the contests?

I am a very keen participant in writing contests (not the photography ones). I was very active in the Africa Destubathon. However since then I have not chanced upon any contest - the fixed period ones, not the 10/50K challenges. Today I glanced upon https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/UNESCO_Challenge, though the date had ended by then. Where do I find a list of all the short term contests on different Wikimedia projects? Jupitus Smart 18:04, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Jupitus Smart, Wondering if Contests page will help or inactive International writing contest page. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:13, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Therein lies part of the problem @JoeHebda:. The UNESCO Challenge I had mentioned above did not show up in either page. So it would have been futile to add either page to my watchlist. What I need is a more comprehensive list, or some other medium that mentions new events (including Contests). I don't think Signpost mentions such details, otherwise it would have been useful. Jupitus Smart 05:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps the Wikipedia:Contests page should be more widely advertised. A mention at WP:VP, perhaps? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:54, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

Does a teahouse have a name ?

What is the name of this teahouse ?Wholecube (talk) 05:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Teahouse. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:57, 12 June 2017 (UTC).

COI

I am an employee of a small non-profit historical site. We would like the info about our site to be placed on Wikipedia and I was given the task. Is this a major conflict of interest that will result in our contribution being denied?Folle avoine (talk) 16:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello Folle avoine, and welcome to the Teahouse. It is a significant conflict of interest, but it need not prevent the info being included, if it is apropriate, and things are done properly.

First, review our guideline on notability, our specific guideline on the notability of organizations. Consider whether your organization (or the site it runs) clearly meets the standards listed there.
Second, read Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
Third, Disclose your connection with the group in accordance with WP:PAID. This is absolutely required, omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
Fourth, Gather sources. You want independent professionally published reliable sources that each discuss the organization in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop, an article will not be created. Sources do NOT need to be online, although it is helpful if at least some are. The independent part is vital in this case. Not press releases, nor news stories based on press releases, or anythign published by the organization itself or its affiliates. Not strictly local coverage. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the org in detail. But those significant sources are needed first.)
Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in your case with the conflict of interest it is essential.
Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed.
Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is rejected, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:12, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I took the liberty of bolding a very important part of DESiegel's comments. While paid editing of Wikipedia is allowed precisely because people like you are a net positive to the encyclopedia, it needs to be transparent. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm starting my new page again.

I want to make a page for The Harry R Horvitz Center. It's a palliaitve care center in a major Cleveland Ohio hospital. I started out by making a pge for the Harry R Horvitz Center in my sand box last year and moved my drafted Harry R Horvitz Center wikipage over to be a real article last May. It was promptly deleted because I had just copied some information from several published articles instead of using my own words. But since I had the exact references... I thought I could quote the published articles. So do I start completely over... or edit my own first attempt??? B. Hullihen (talk) 10:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, B. Hullihen. It sounds as if you started in a sensible way, but then took a short cut and moved the article over yourself rather than requesting a review. You're perfectly entitled to do this, but as you found, it is risky for a newish editor to do.

You can quote limited material from sources, but you must present them as explicit quotations, and they must be within reasonable limits of size: see WP:Quotations. The bulk of the article should be based on published sources, but summarised in new words. As for whether to work from your draft or start again, I can't tell you I'm afraid. Either is possible, depending on whether you think you can rescue your draft, or it would need to be rebuilt from scratch. --ColinFine (talk) 10:37, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Exactly! As I have read in the wiki intro... I did move it over myslef which caused the article's early demissal. I want my articel to be just like the accepted ... St Christopher's Hospice... wiki page.

B. Hullihen (talk) 10:48, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing St Christopher's Hospice to our notice, B. Hullihen. I have just tagged it as written like an advert, and completely lacking references. Please do not treat it as a model. It is one of the millions of articles which are seriously below the standard we now require for new articles. If you want a model, find something comparable in Category:Good articles. --ColinFine (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I have reverted this article to an earlier version that I think is both preferable and acceptable.[1] Thincat (talk) 15:45, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Google search of Wiki article

Hi,

I would like to know why this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parassala_B._Ponnammal is not showing in the google search. Please help.

Thanks

Sriram Venkitachalam 11:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriram Venkitachalam (talk • contribs)

Hello, Sriram Venkitachalam, and welcome to the Teahouse. The article needs to be patrolled by one of our new pages patrollers, or 90 days need to elapse. See Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing#Indexing of articles ("mainspace"). – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 12:24, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Finnusertop, thank you very for the clarification. Sriram Venkitachalam 16:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriram Venkitachalam (talk • contribs)

deleted company page

I'm trying to submit a page for my company. I have indicated my conflict of interest and here is the content that I have posted. I'm not sure why it keeps getting rejected. I have reputable sources to back up each of these points. Entripy Custom Clothing is Canada’s first online provider of custom printed apparel [1]. The Canadian company screen prints and embroiders logos onto t-shirts, sweatshirts and other apparel items for businesses, schools, charities and special events across Canada. Entripy was founded in 1999 by Jas Brar. Today, Entripy employs over 100 people and operates out of a 50,000 square foot facility in Oakville, Ontario. Lisa.Evans (talk) 15:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Lisa.Evans. The reason why it keeps getting rejected is stated clearly on your user talk page: because each time it has appeared to be unambiguous advertising. It is especially hard for people closely associated with a topic to see what is and what isn't neutral or (on the other hand) promotional; which is why editing with a conflict of interest is discouraged. The way I think of it is this: Wikipedia does not care much what a subject says about themselves, and it cares not at all what they want said about them. All that Wikipedia is interested in is what people with no connection to the subject have published about it. Especially for somebody with a conflict of interest, you need to identify the independent, reliably published sources which have said something about the company (note that this excludes anything published by the company, and also anything based on a press release or interview with the company), and then forget everything you know about the company and write an article based solely on what these independent sources have said (though in your own words). If that gives you a substantial article, then you can add some uncontroversial factual information like places and dates from the company's own publications. But if you can't find a published source for some information, it doesn't go in. And if you can find only non-independent sources, you consider very carefully whether the information is open to discussion, and if so, it doesn't go in. And any even slightly evaluative or judgmental words go in only if they are direct attributed quotes from an independent source. --ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Article

Can someone help me to create an article in wikipedia and get approved , I've tried so many times but all fail. Please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexhino Kovaci (talk • contribs)

Hello, Rexhino Kovaci You appear to have been trying to create an autobiography on your user page. The lesser error in this is that your User page is not an appropriate place for an article: it is for you to share as much information as you wish about you as a Wikipedia editor. The more serious problem is that autobiography is strongly discouraged in Wikipedia. If you wish to help us improve Wikipedia by learning how to edit and create articles, you are most welcome. If your purpose is to publicise yourself, please find another place to do it. --ColinFine (talk) 16:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

I've just realised that you got a much fuller answer to the same question further up the page. --ColinFine (talk) 16:20, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Can I ask a reviewer to patrol the page I made?

The page is called "Elixir Press." It appears when searched, but I would like it to appear in Google search. Please help. Booksnob (talk) 15:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Booksnob. I am not a regular reviewer, but I have had a quick look at Elixir Press. In my view it has no hope of being accepted as it stands, because it has not a single reference in which somebody unconnected with Elixir Press has written substantial material about the company. Furthermore, it reads like an advert. The question is, what have independent people published about Elixir press? If there is material, it should be cited, and summarised in the article. If there is not, then the company fails notability, and there should not be an article.

I also wonder, from your eagerness for it to appear in Google (which to my mind is a complete irrelevance since Wikipedia has its own search facility, and Wikipedia may not be used for promotion) if you have a connection with Elixir Press? If you have, then you should be aware of the policy on conflict of interest, and possibly on paid editing. --ColinFine (talk) 16:46, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello ColinFine, I am not a paid editor, just a newbie at Wikipedia who accesses many pages via Google. The page is quite similar to other small press pages I've seen in the number and quality of references but I will see what can be done. The tone of the page could use some adjustments. Thanks again. Booksnob (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately there are lots of poor-quality articles on Wikipedia, Booksnob. Most of them predate today's standards for inclusion, so it's best not to use them as a yardstick for what is acceptable. Hopefully, with time, these older articles will be improved or deleted, but it's a big task. In the meantime, we should strive to hold new articles to a high standard so that we don't further contribute to the problem. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi Booksnob I hope you don't mind my asking, but if you are not a paid editor, why is it so important for your work to appear in a Google search? Google doesn't find much in the way of independent WP:Reliable sources for me, so I'm wondering whether Elixir Press is WP:Notable. Dbfirs 17:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Can I create this page?

I want to create a page of a celebrity dietician based in India. She is a consultant with NDTV health section, very popular with media - print and digital.

If I create this page will it be accepted?

Shilpa Arora (talk) 13:01, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hey Shilpa Arora. This really depends on what types of sources are available and whether or not the subject meets our standards for notability, which is normally shown by demonstrating that the subject has received sustained in-depth coverage in reliable sources. TimothyJosephWood 13:59, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The best way is to create a Draft and then submit it via The article for creation process. There, an experienced editor can judge whether the page is fit for Wikipedia or not. They can then move it to the main space if its OK or suggest you ways for improving it if its not. Regards, Yashovardhan (talk) 17:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Historic 1888 Firehouse lots of is community interest- flagged and deleted- Why?

Historic 1888 Firehouse with lots of articles -some books have related content but predate digital. Engine House is historically significant- put out of service in 1980 renovated in 2016 for use as gym and design studio. The renovation won design award. How can I get listing started? How can I avoid being flagged? The entire page in the sandbox was factual, historical. We posted in sandbox to get help not get deleted. Help please EngineHouse16 (talk) 14:58, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

For convenience of readers, they are referring to User:EngineHouse16/sandbox --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, EngineHouse16. It is unusual for a sandbox to get deleted, but the message on your user talk page indicates that in the opinion of TheSandDoctor the content was not only not suitable for a Wikipedia article, but could not be made into something suitable. I cannot see the deleted material, so I cannot comment on that; but your use of the word "listing" suggests that you are under the (very common) misapprehension that Wikipedia is some sort of directory or business guide. As you will find by reading some of the links on your user talk page, Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind, and it does not contain "profiles" or "listings", but articles which summarise what indepedent published sources have said about a subject.

I suggest you read your first article, and try again. Non-digital sources are perfectly acceptable, as long as they have been published by a reputable publisher (vanity publishing less so). But the article should say only what the sources say (though not in the same words) not what you or I or the subject of the article know or think. --ColinFine (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for tagging me ColinFine. While I do not remember the exact content of the page, it was written in such a way that it read somewhat like an advertisement (G11) and appeared to be a not web host violation (U5), which it appears Athaenara agreed with me on (they deleted it with those as the explanation).

EngineHouse16 The advice that ColinFine gave above is good and is pretty much what I would have said as well. I do not recall exactly, but what was the name of the firehall? I debated about reporting the username (EngineHouse16) as a promotional username as (if I recall correctly) the firehouse had a similar name but ultimately decided against doing so as I did not see a strong enough connection to warrant not assuming good faith (AGF). --TheSandDoctor (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

EngineHouse16, except for the opening paragraph, the sandbox consisted entirely of a copy of a newspaper article "A Lot of Use Is Left in an Old Firehouse in N. Point Breeze" from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette including the statement "(c)2016 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette". There were 1175 words of copied text. I would have deleted it as a copyright violation. Wikipedia articles must not include text copied from outside sources (except in very limited circumstances which do not apply here).

An article on this firehouse might possibly be created legitimately, provided that there is enough discussion in Independent published reliable sources to make it notable. But the article must not be a simple copy of an outside source, it must be written in original words. The article that has been copied might well be one cited source. Some non-local sources would be desirable, also.

I would also suggest a change of username, to one that does not appear to be for shared use by a group. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC) @TheSandDoctor: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:09, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Is Any Similar Technology like signalr for Real time Communication?

Is Any Similar Technology like signalr for Real time Communication? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayushjain772 (talk • contribs) 19:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ayushjain772: Welcome to Wikipedia. The Teahouse is for asking questions related to Wikipedia. Please ask your question at the Reference Desk. RudolfRed (talk) 20:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Page for Karen Dionne has been tagged as not meeting Notability requirements

I believe the page for Karen Dionne actually does meet Wiki's Notability standards (WP:CREATIVE) for the following reasons:

1. Dionne did win an international award, please see References section: "Previous Scribe Awards Winners: The Ninth Annual Scribe Awards". International Association of Media Tie-In Writers. May 2, 2017.

2. Dionne's work has been reviewed by multiple "independent, secondary sources" such as Publishers Weekly and RT Book Review. Again, see Reference section, specifically: - "Freezing Point: Karen Dionne, Author". Publishers Weekly. August 11, 2008. - "Boiling Point: K.L. Dionne, Author". Publishers Weekly. November 1, 2010. - "The Marsh King's Daughter: Karen Dionne, Author". Publishers Weekly. April 3, 2017. - "RT Book Review Award for Mystery Suspense & Thriller - 2008".

Please review article again with the above facts in mind and respond with specific details if you find that the article still does not meet notability requirements. Respectfully, FactsForYouFactsForYou (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, FactsForYou. I'm not a reviewer, but I've had a look; and I don't see it. As I read the IAMTW listing, she was not a winner but short-listed (I didn't find an explanation, but in each category there are several works listed one (occasionally two) of which is bolded. I read that the the bold entry is the winner). And short reviews which say nothing about the author are really not to the point. --ColinFine (talk) 20:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello, FactsForYou. See my detailed comments at Talk:Karen Dionne#Notability and sources. You may be on the way, but notability is some distance from being established here, in my view. The tag should stay for now. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:43, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Correct way to create an article about my company

Hi - I wish to create a page for my company. The purpose is present a history of the company (not an advert) we've been business since 1969 and are a record label... but I saw in the guidelines "do not make a page for your company" so I wonder, how do these pages get created and how do I do so within the rules. Much of the historic info would come from interviews with the owner/founder. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated. MDMathews (talk) 23:50, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

MDMathews - Don't. That would be the correct way. Interviews are seldom an acceptable source for an encyclopedia, which by definition is tertiary. In other words in an encyclopedia, we do not write about a given subject. Instead, we write about what is written about a given subject in reliable published sources. You may list your company at WP:Requested articles, but before you do be sure to properly disclose your conflict of interest exactly as instructed in WP:COI and WP:PAID. John from Idegon (talk) 00:12, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

How to add the photo of Joep Franssen wiki page - English?

You see a photo of the Dutch Composer Joep Franssens in all his Wiki pages in different languages. In the English page this picture is missing. There is no frame/template. How do I get this done? Or perhaps somebody can add this for me? This would be super!!! Kind Regards Ieke van der Huijzen - HollandIekevanderHuijzen 06:25, 13 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by IekevanderHuijzen (talk • contribs)

Hi IekevanderHuijzen. I added a photo of Franssens found on Commons to the article and also did some other minor cleanup. I just used a very basic image syntax. If you'd like to add an WP:INFOBOX to the article as well, then try asking for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musicians or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. I believe there are specific infoboxes for composers such as Template:Infobox classical composer which may work well in an article like this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Do I have to reference every edit that I make?

When is a reference needed and what sort of sites can be used as references - e.g. can it be a news website? Edward1612 (talk) 07:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Please see Verifiability - "Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it."
In general anything that could be questioned, or may need to be checked, must be referenced. So, a claim that "X went to school Y" or "the population of Z was 12,345 in 2017" would definitely need a reference.

News sites can be used provided they are "reliable", but some tabloid papers and similar sites are generally not considered reliable sources. Scrolling news sites are particularly difficult to reference - as the news will have "moved on" and not be available to subsequent readers. Please note that as stated at Template cite news {{Cite news}} is normally used for offline (paper) sources as it includes issue= and volume= parameters, whereas {{Cite web}} is best for online sources, as it generates a missing URL error when no URL is provided. - Arjayay (talk) 08:18, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Addition of reference

Hello

I want to enquire about the technique and process of adding a reference (address of source material) in regard to any comment added by me/edited by me.

Kindly help !!

Warm Regards Satyaketu Mallik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Satyaketu Mallik (talk • contribs) 07:05, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Satyaketu Mallik - Please see Help:Referencing for beginners - if, having read that, you have any questions, please come back here and ask. - Arjayay (talk) 08:21, 13 June 2017 (UTC)