Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 668

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 665

Archive 666

Archive 667

→

Need help!

I want to ask that how to add a reference i am confused — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ataurrehman942 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ataurrehman942. Please start by reading Referencing for beginners, and feel free to ask more specific questions here at any time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:06, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Adventure - Mission 1 - Problem

I am working through The Wikipedia Adventure with some of my students, and noticed that in Mission 1, there is a part of it - Your turn - that seems to stop working. I got to the pop-up when it asks me to us Edit source (I do not have an option for Create source as it asks) and click it, but then nothing happens. It does not progress or ask me to do anything else next.

Can you please help or give me direction for things to try?

This is the message where it stalls: >>>>> Your turn!

Creating your userpage on Wikipedia is as simple as editing it.

Click CREATE SOURCE or EDIT SOURCE above.

(This adventure always uses the SOURCE editor). >>>>>

Thank you. FULBERT (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, FULBERT. I suggest that you report the problem at Wikipedia talk:The Wikipedia Adventure. I am also pinging Ocaasi (WMF), an editor and Wikimedia Foundation staffer who helped develop the Adventure. You may also find editors who can help at Village pump - Technical. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:19, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Can You Help With a Draft Article?

Hi, I have rewritten a draft article about Atlantis and renamed it “Atlantis Historicity.” The goal is to let people know that the story of Atlantis itself has a rich history in literature and human interest. I would appreciate it if you as an editor would go over the content, to see if I am keeping it simple with just the facts. I would like to get a few more comments before I submit it for approval. Thanks to those of you who have helped to get it to this point. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Atlantis_Historicity AlternateYou 17:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlternateYou (talk • contribs)

Welcome to the Teahouse, AlternateYou. We already have a very well developed and well referenced article Atlantis that describes the rich literary history of the Atlantis myth and discusses its historicity at great length. Please read about Splitting and Content forking for the procedure and guideline that address such issues. I see no need for a separate article. I consider it highly unlikely that your draft will be approved. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi AlternateYou. Currently this draft article is forbidden original research, with you interpreting and evaluating primary sources, rather than text summarizing what secondary sources have to say by their interpretation of primary source material, as cited to those secondary sources. Let's be concrete with one emblematic example—the very first sentence:

"The history of Atlantis started with Plato and his dialogue Critias."^{[citation to "Critias (dialogue), by Plato"]}

This is original research. Critias itself does not confirm it is the start of the history of Atlantis. Without a secondary source being cited, directly verifying the information that Critias is the first mention and start of Atlantis' "history", this information comes from you, stating that the source you are citing is the start of history. The entire draft is in that nature. It may be that this primary source, interpretive essay can be transformed into a useful article, if not duplicative of content already at Atlantis or some satellite article I have not looked for, but that requires that you entirely change its nature, from the ground up. Right now, this draft has no place here. P.S., just one comment on formatting: Do not link anything in section titles. Anything you link should be in the text following the title. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:41, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Difficult to create a artist page.

How do I create a page for a movie artist when the cast name appears, I can click in that artist name? The name is in blue? Thegreatweird (talk) 20:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Thegreatweird. Normally an article title appears in blue if there is an existing article with the name, and clicking on it will take you to that page. If this is not happening, the link is likely a redirect to a different article that has something to do with that subject. In some cases a redirect means that the subject is not independently notable, but in some other cases it's there for convenience because nobody has written an article on them yet. In that case you can turn the redirect into an article of its own. To do that, though, you'll have to have source material like magazine articles or newspaper coverage. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: Laytongku article construction.

How can I write an article in my own words without it coming from my personal experience. It has been noted that I should write the article in my own words and only cite other sources without copying any text from what is considered published copyright articles. It has also been noted that Wikipedia is not a platform for me to have my own personal information published and unless my thesus/paper/essay in the library of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford University (perhaps on a shelf in the president's care) it is not considered refrence material by Wikipedia yet there are current situations that explain all of these issues concerning my article: LAYTONGKU. First] there is very little information concerning the village of Laytongku anywhere to use as a source to cite. The very few that I found I cannot use and when I did were deleted as copyright material (something I wasn't aware of at the time) also there are no maps upon which Latyongku is found other then Thai Tourist maps of the Umphang District published in the Thai language and one I found from a trekthailand site that offers an excellent Forest Map showing most of the 31 villages in this area with Laytongku included. I tried to add that source and it was rejected. I have not attempted to add that map or any other map from any commercial tourist guide of the Tak Province of Thailand.

My real reason for creating this article was for the specific reason that Latyongku is relatively unknown and more reasonably as a result of the fact that I personally lived among the villagers for a good amount of time and have first hand knowledge and experience. I had hesitated even creating an article for Wikipedia and labored over many months not giving it to do so when finally I felt a simple mention with a Laytongku page outlining mostly its coordinates and location, which in the very top of my article, and not to go any further since my interest is not to stir it up as a tourist destination, as is not in the interest of the Telakan Karen hill tribes living there but give some credence to their existance. I have been instructed to give several sources to cite yet all are probably copyright works. So I rewrote the entire article in my own words and only adding when something was added, as in some information on the practices of animism, or information concerning the early migrations of the Karen I did so by citing those books in my library that I have immediate access to yet I did not quote anything as written but instead when I mention something and it includes the word "Shaman" I cite a book in my library: Spirit Possession in the Nepal Himalayas. It has nothing to do with Laytongku but has to do with a segment of animism and this too I cite a few sources such as other books in my library: Encyclopedia of Religion & Religions and Sir James George Frazer's The Golden Bough. Any other sources I chose from the 1952 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica and the New American Encyclopedia. I cited: Richard Diran's book: The Vanishing Tribes of Burma, but only as a reference that he wrote something about the Karen and referred to some mention of a term which I wrote about. Additionally I cited Beurgin, R. who has written extensively on the trials and tribulations of what these Telakan Karen have suffered and are suffering. Although I started out using that information not knowing it wasn't permitted in my most recent draft and possibly my completed draft for submission I never quoted one thing from him but only again when I mention a term, such as Phu Chaik, which is a proper title and common knowledge, I cite that that name is in a Buregin source.

As far as continuing with the article I find little I wish to include and had I not been encouraged by Wikipedia would probably not added as much as I have. Also since sources had to be cited I didn't feel recording my own name and source to cite was any less valuable then any other person's work whether copyright or not. Many sources that I had also earlier added since they were on the subject of either Karen and Animist I deleted since I do not have easy access to read what they have written and again since none of their material centers on the village of Laytongku I find no reason to cite them as sources even though many claim connection with The Siam Society in Bangkok.

I do not consider that what I have written in this article is my effort to have my work published. I do not need my essay published. It was only created to share some information I knew would be of interest to the Senior Fellow in the Anthropology/Geography departments of St. Edmund Hall at Oxford University.

I am also aware that my article does not have any templates on the right hand side showing maps, photos or other data as in other Wikipedia articles. I do not know if this is actually necessary for such a simple article that only touches upon geography and anthropology. Yet I would like to have added one for a map (maybe) but a few photos that I took myself and I own outright to illustrate certain things in the architecture and clothing...on the other hand I do not want to expose these people to un-necessary coverage throughout the world and feel for their protection, since they trust me and my association with them I only add perhaps one photo of an early structure in which they live without any personal mention other then it is typical of a Telakan Karen house of early origin still in use.

This has been a very intense experience trying to write something worth publishing whilst at the same time being either guided to do a thing or two, comply with how all Wikipedia articles are formatted and directives to write everything in my own words. I have done that and now know nothing else I can do to satisfy Wikipedia. I do not say this as a criticism since most people well versed in computer language have a certain way of explaining ' how to do' something it isn't exactly clear in my mind in order to do it. This has been the case for citing sources, until by accident managed to find how to do it by adding the citation at either the end of a sentence or after the word it refers to. Now perhaps I might find a way again by accident to add a template for a photo if I can manage to find the page that indicates 'how to do' this.

I do not see myself creating any more articles for Wikipedia. This will be, as far as I know at the moment, the only one I will attempt to do. If it is rejected then I am sorry I was not able to do the thing correctly. I feel that if it isn't included in some reasonable format that is a great loss for Wikipedia and not for me since I gave it my best effort. I do thank all and/or everyone who has tried to assist me in this effort but I feel I need, if I consider it important, to continue merely continuing my manuscript/essay that is only in part now on a shelf at St. Edmund Hall, Oxford University that may or may not ever be published. My real concern is to further my personal knowledge and continue living among the Telakan Karen in the village of Laytongku and if no one else knows about this village then that may perhaps be the greatest achievement I have accomplished. Let Laytongku be that mysterious place like Shangri La, Zanadu or The Garden of Eden. Thank you, PaLukiWa/Tzaims Luksus, FRSAPalukiwa (talk) 16:32, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

If I have missed anything that you said that should be taken into account, I apologize, but this is a bit of a wall of text, and so I only skimmed. Based on what I did absorb, though, you seem to be basing this article off of an unpublished thesis. For an article to belong on Wikipedia, it must have significant coverage in reliable third-party sources. If this is your thesis, you can't use it as a source. This constitutes original research and is prohibited. You say that the "very few" sources you found you could not use. I don't know what you mean by this. Did they have a negative view? Did they not have very much information? As per the copyright issue, I am not an administrator and thus do not have access to the material in question, but to avoid copyright violations, you must loosely paraphrase the source material at most. Really, sourcing should mostly be used for attributing individual facts, for example "When he graduated Jonathan Archer High School in 2290, John James Smith began attending the engineering branch of James Tiberius Kirk Memorial College ^[18]." and the source might say, "John James Smith attended Jonathan Archer High School from 2287 to 2290, and then James Tiberius Kirk Memorial College until 2296, graduating with a degree in engineering." Notice that the article text does not look the same as the source text, but it states the same information. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 18:35, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Palukiwa. The draft article in question is Draft:Laytongku. This draft has a fundamental problem which cannot easily be resolved, and a series of lesser problems that can be solved easily. The major problem is that recounting your personal experiences living in this village is original research and Wikipedia does not publish original research. Period. The restriction on publishing original research is a core content policy and is not negotiable.

Therefore, the only way forward is to remove every single word of content that is based on your personal experience living in this village. The content that remains must summarize what has been previously published in reliable sources about this village. Perhaps the resulting article will only be 5% as long. That is OK. Most articles about villages are short. It is far better to have a short article that complies with our core content policies than a long article that doesn't.

So, if you remove every single thing from the draft which is based on your personal experience, then return here to the Teahouse, and we can help you iron out the other issues. Do not worry about an infobox, maps and photos at this time. Once your prose complies with our policies, it will be easy for experienced editors to help you with those secondary items, which are not required in any case.

There are many publications that do publish original research. You should submit that content elsewhere. If you get it published in a reliable source, then it can be cited and briefly summarized in a Wikipedia article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I suppose the question is whether the PhD thesis qualifies as that reliable source, Cullen328 (although it is unclear how much of the article is based on the thesis, because of a lack of inline citations). Cordless Larry (talk) 19:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I see no evidence that this is a PhD thesis, Cordless Larry. It seems to be an informal paper written by the editor without academic review and and given to Oxford University. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

At Draft:Laytongku#References, it's described as "a D.Phil anthropological essay", which is pretty ambiguous. Could you clarify, Palukiwa? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

A 'D.Phil anthropological essay' is a thesis prepared and submitted as part of a Doctorate, they are published after the fact, so at some point this ought to be a reliable source. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 20:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

New NFL rivalry

I feel like we should make a new NFL page on the rivalry between the Packers and Seahawks. What do you think?20:36, 10 September 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vinnylospo (talk • contribs)

Vinnylospo, I'm inclined to agree with you. In order to write an article we have to have independent, reliable sources, but given the vast amount of media coverage the NFL gets that should be no problem. If you want to write the article you might want to contact some of the folks at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League. They are primarily the editors who write and update NFL articles. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Am I allowed to write my own article or not?

I have looked over the notes sent to me, PaLukiWa and in part answered or questioned certain things in my previous Question on Teahouse, however, I have had other issues come to mind and I feel I must identify them at this point. I am accused of trying to have Wikipedia publish my original work. That is so untrue I cannot describe it easily yet had I intended that I wouldn't have started by having Palukiwa as my user name. I would simply have given my real name. I initially and still want my article to be nameless: Anonymous...that certainly doesn't indicate my interest in having my name mentioned for publication.

The only reason that I finally revealed my real name with Palukiwa as my "nom de plume" was because it was indicated that any photos added had to be free of copyright. Since the only photos I plan or had planned adding are my own and protected by me and therefore any confusion whether Palukiwa had the right to add them explains the source of the photos as original.

Therefore I then decided to add my own name as a source since my Essay, "My Experience and Knowledge Living Among the Telakan Karen in the Village of Laytongku." which is also in part 'a work in progress' partially sent to St. Edmund Hall, Oxford University, I felt it was really the main source to be cited indicating that I actually wrote the article off the top of my knowledge whether from encyclopedias or first hand knowledge. I was greatly honoured to actually be able to live in the village of Laytongku in the homes of the Telakan Karen who made me part of their family and gave me the name Pa Luki Wa. Luki for short. I hope that explains that part of my reasoning for this article as it has unfolded as a result of my decision of offering it to Wikipedia. I didn't want a web site and find many new web sites detrimental to the welfare and preservation of the village of Laytongku and wish not to direct anyone to them from my article. Is that clear?

Now and in the first place I did not want to use any source from living people and especially citing sources that can be found on the Internet as personal cites, .coms, .orgs, .inof. YouTube, Christian missionaries reports, or political commentaries and generalizations, and in fact other then mentioning the Thungyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary, which gives a general location of the village of Laytongku I had no interest in citing anyone other then from books. Initially I thought Wikipedia wanted whole articles quoted from ready sources, however, I found that was not the case so I am happy that they no longer exist in my article. The books I cited are those I have used for decades in various religious research or research on animism, native tribes et al and therefore my favorites I have specifically used are: Frazer's: The Golden Bough, New american Encyclopedia, 1952 Edition Encyclopedia Britannica, Reinhard's section in: Spirit Possession in the Nepal Himalayas, an area I have lived, and Pike's: Encyclopedia of Religion & Religions. I see no reason to cite any other sources since none really apply to what I intended or have written.

I now feel I should remove both Buergin, R. since there is nothing actually that he has written that hasn't been lifted from other sources and also remove R. Diran's: The Vanishing Tribes of Burma, since he didn't write the text in his book of photography but had it added from lifted info by its two writers. Besides the text is very limited and not authoritative or scholary. I will delete those two sources in due course with my next edit.

Information on Animism, the Karen, even the Telakan Karen of Laytongku is all public knowledge and citing "Pho Chaik" to Buergin is ridiculous since he got it from Paul Keenan's: Faith at a Crossroad and Keenan got it from early Baptist missionary reports dating back to the 1850s and the Baptist's got it from the Karen besides I got it directly from the Telakan Karen in the Village of Laytongku. I prefer not to cite any Christian missionary reports since they are all incorrect and basically give creit to themselves rather then acknowledging true Karen animist belief. The Creation Legend for one thing is something the Christian Missionaries claim they added to the Karen animist faith, however, in actuallity the Bible lifted the Creation Legend from the Animists worldwide as well as the Karen. I cited Drum Publication Group, a Thai organization in Kamchanburi since they are a ready source for Karen knowledge along with publishing Karen-English dictionaries and grammars as well as "Karen Proverbs" and "The Ways of Our Ancestors", a manuscript written only in Sgaw Karen language and therefore not an easy source to cite on a Wikipedia article unless one can translate Sgaw Karen and at present I cannot manage that. Perhaps in time once I manage to translate Sgaw Karen into English which is something I am working on at present.

I am now reconsidering also how much information I want to add to or edit out of my article: Laytongku, but for the moment I only plan to edit out the two: Beurgin and Diran sources since I see no reason to lead people to them or believe they are original sources or even authorities on the subject and merely commercial wanabee writers seeking recognition. If Wikipedia guidelines or rules is not favorable to my interests and procedures then I cannot see how I can accommodate Wikipedia any further and therefore ask: Am I right to take this position and/or is Wikipedia willing to work with my on this draft to make it suitable for a final review and be placed among the articles on Wikipedia? I don't mind if it is only a very simple article with references to geographic information and Latitude/Longitude coordinates (which I have already indicated) as well as the Thongyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary. What more could possibly be necessary or important to this article? Thank your for welcoming me to the Wikipedia Teahouse and the opportunity to create this article, though now only a draft, and my ability to print it out whether it is ever accepted or published. For me the experience has been intense, somewhat difficult but enlightening. I am not a wannabe Wikipedia Editor or plan to create any more articles for Wikipedia. My best wishes and gratitude for what has been for me both extremely difficult, demanding, on a time wise issue, frustrating and generally unfruitful, criticized and dragged to limits I never expected to have been subjected to, insulted, declared a copyist-pirate and plagiarist, yet an experience I am grateful to have taken on without any previous knowledge of how Wikipedia operates. Yours, and Thank you again. PaLukiWa (Luki)/a/k/a Tzaims Luksus, FRSAPalukiwa (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok I think I get the gist. Firstly you are clearly thinking of wikipedia 'articles' as the same type of 'article' you would find in a journal at Oxford. There are no similarities except for name - they are completely different.

A wikipedia article is a webpage created entirely of information paraphrased from existing published work that anyone can reasonably be expected to be able get a copy of. where the information came from has to linked as a 'reference'.

For this reason, paraphrasing from .com's and internet sites is highly recommended and the best course of action. paraphrasing from books is allowed, but if you do, please give the ISBN number or Google books entry so people know where it came from.

Knowing something to be true is totally irrelevant, your unpublished thesis is also, for wikipedia, totally irrelevant. If a book is unknown, they you will have to prove it exists and is reliable.

Copying text directly is not allowed, you have to paraphrase it so that the copyright is not infringed.

You might want to read WP:N, WP:V and WP:RS. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 20:46, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree with most of what Aguyintobooks says, but just to note that scholarly books are generally better sources than websites, where they exist on the topic. See WP:SOURCETYPES. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:58, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Help.

I'm trying to create a page for an actor, but they're deleting. Can someone help me because I'm really having difficulties. They've already deleted 3 pages of these.Thegreatweird (talk) 21:11, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Thegreatweird, and welcome to the Teahouse. The latest version of the article in question is at Owen Campbell (actor); the previously-deleted articles had slightly different names. Please do not simply recreate the same article with the same problems, Thegreatweird, as that will lead to the title being "salted" (made so that new articles with that title can no longer be created except by administrators). Each time the articles you have tried to create has been nominated for speedy deletion, there was information given about what was wrong with the articles, but you don't seem to have been heeding those warnings.

All Wikipedia articles must meet Wikipedia's notability standard, which is quite specific and not the ordinary use of "notable". In this case, you would need to demonstrate that Owen Campbell meets Wikipedia's particular notability standard for actors, and/or the general notability guideline. If you know an article is incomplete, you should create it as a draft at Articles for Creation, where it will be designated as a draft and should not be deleted for being incomplete.

Also note that IMDB is not considered a reliable source and should not be cited as a reference in Wikipedia articles.

I hope this addresses your questions. Feel free to return to the Teahouse with any further questions you may have. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 21:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

First timer unsure about process or protocol.

Hello, I edited the plot and reception sections of this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Time_to_Love_and_a_Time_to_Die because the plot was inaccurate and I thought an addition to the reception page might offer better balance. Both of them have been reverted. I'm not sure how to communicate with the writer of the article (the person who reverted my changes) to explain that the plot as it exists is incorrect and I don't understand why my quote from a book about the film has been refused. Perhaps by looking at the page, you may be able to elucidate? Richard White Squishband (talk) 09:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Squishband, welcome to the Teahouse. I can't claim to speak for Lugnuts (the user who reverted you), but it seems likely that he felt your additions made the plot section overlong for the article (we generally prefer shorter sections detailing the plot of books and films). You can talk to him about it by leaving a message at his talkpage, or you can start a discussion on the article's talkpage at Talk:A Time to Love and a Time to Die. Either way, be aware that you can't just keep switching back to your preferred version; this isn't allowed by Wikipedia's policies - you need to have a chat first and come up with a compromise that you're both happy with. You seem like a reasonable guy, so I'm sure that won't prove difficult. Best of luck, Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:26, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Actually, having looked again, it seems that your additions were copied from another website - we can't permit copyrighted text to be used on Wikiepdia (see WP:COPYVIO). Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:28, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Summary in La Luna Sangre

What happened to the Summary section of La Luna Sangre ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pipamidalton (talk • contribs) 19:46, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

It's not normal for a Wikipedia article to have a Summary section, and I have found no evidence that La Luna Sangre ever had one. It did once have a Synopsis section, which was deleted by Joongjul in this edit. Maproom (talk) 21:48, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I was the first one to create synopsis section. And I removed for too much changes. The synopsis section is too long. But if you would like to add synopsis section, make it simple but short. Joongjul (talk) 10:53, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

retaining Appuraman's article

how should I retain the Appuraman page? how many references should I give to retain? Jay Jefferson (talk) 10:44, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

At least three reliable news reports or other reliable sources to show he is notable, and then enough references to prove all the film appearances mentioned. The fact the article is at AfD suggests that people can't find enough sources to satisfy WP:V and WP:N guidelines. the guideline for sources is WP:RS. I recommend reading all three. You can't use Imdb, facebook or anything published by the actor himself because they are viewed as unreliable. Interviews and obvious press releases are also often discounted. Generally speaking, the more written about him in a source, the better, passing mentions will often be ignored. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 11:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Once you have located the sources, make sure to say so on the Afd page, as well as explaining how the article now meets WP:N guidelines, accessed via the red template box at the top of the article page. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 11:07, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Help

How do you put in a help me citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lookis (talk • contribs) 03:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Lookis. Assuming this is about including a citation inside a Wikipedia article, you will find guidance at this link. If you still have questions, do come back. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 12:14, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Lookis, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your question is worded ambiguously.

If you want to know how to use the help me template, the answer is to simply place the text {{help me}} on either your talk page or the talk page of whichever article you want help with.

If you want help placing inline citations, there is a guide at Help:Referencing for beginners, and you're welcome to return to the Teahouse with any further questions you may have.

Also, please "sign" Teahouse and talk page posts with four tildes (~~~~). —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 12:19, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

My changes are being reversed.

I have made some changes, due to errors on the page, such as a website link but someone has changed it back. They stated the change was "unexplained". What should I do so that the changes are not deleted? 87.244.120.49 (talk) 13:21, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Your edits to HandMade Films were certainly unexplained – you didn't use a single edit summary. If you don't want your edits reverted, you should, among other things, avoid unexplained deletions of content. Maproom (talk) 13:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello anonymous and welcome to the Teahouse.

Your fellow editors are much more likely to allow your changes to remain if they are both explained and sourced. Updating infoboxes is tough because standard practices are not insistent on sourcing for infobox content. In principle, nothing should appear in the infobox that is not sourced in the article. If you have a source for your changes and can mention it in the edit summary, while not ideal, that will generally be considered as documentation for the change. Otherwise, you need to discuss the changes on the article's talk page. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:03, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Nazim Hussain Pakism

I'm Nazim Hussain Pak. In past days, about 20 accounts have been blocked, being accused to be my sockpuppets. 18 of them are unknown for me. I just want to return to again start as a good one, taking use of WP:OFFER. I can not not return as a Mega sockpuppetier, I say Nazim Hussain Pakism is not true. I'm already in trouble. Please take a look with sympathy. I can not accept those accounts which are not mine. 119.160.98.236 (talk) 14:14, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

And yet those sockpuppet accounts had the same useragent data as you. That useragent data was distinct enough to distinguish between you and a user who shared your IP addresses.

Also, editing through an IP address counts as more sockpuppetry. You will need to log in to your original account and appeal your original block there. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: His talk page access has been revoked so he will need to use UTRS. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Useragent data is akin to a digital fingerprint, unless other people happen to be using an identical device with the same browser, we can say with certainty that all these accounts are you. To take into account this possibility, behavioral characteristics have been considered, taking into account shared edit characteristics. Also by your own admission you have been using at least three accounts. You have to wait 6 months to use WP:OFFER, which is not a guarantee in any event. Α Guy into Bοοks™ § (Message) - 15:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

I'm inclined to believe our friend that not all of the accounts identified were actually his socks. Because he was using the Jazz Pakistan platform, his access would have been mixed with that of others with the same model of cell phone in such a way that distinguishing them would be pretty difficult if not impossible (I don't think individual cell UIDs appear in the internet traffic). Further evidence might need to come from unblock requests on the other accounts. But there's a lot of things checkusers know about that I don't, so they could possibly be right. Nevertheless, I see Nazim Hussain Pak as properly blocked and this particular effort at communication as another improper block evasion. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 01:07, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Just by the fact that he freely admits to using two other accounts proves the ban was correct. Whether it's two accounts or twenty, it still violates the rules. He was banned twice before for the same reason, and both times he plead for another chance. Maybe this time it will stick. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 14:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

"Inside the NFL"

It's not really a question. I am wondering who would be in charge of updating the Showtime series Inside the NFL. I happened to noticed the "hosts" are incorrect. Should be James Brown, Phil Simms, Boomer Esiason, and Ray Lewis. Adam and Brandon are not presenters. Adam hasn't been in two years. Marhsall has been replaced by former Baltimore Raven, Ray Lewis.

I don't know how to edit so thought I'd pass this info on to someone who does. Thanks!

2601:602:9901:3913:546E:EFE0:61D3:213 (talk) 17:21, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome, anonymous, to the Teahouse.

The fact that you managed to post a message here indicates that you have already mastered some of the elements of being a Wikipedia editor. If you don't wish to make these changes yourself, you could make a suggestion on the talk page of the article with the information that you think needs to be updated. Someone who is more familiar with editing, and who knows where to look for suitable references, will likely be along to update the page. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Do you like my article: Laytongku now?

This discussion is closed. Work on the article, if you wish. Don't, if you wish. Nothing further to be accomplished here, obviously. John from Idegon (talk) 18:32, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

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

I have deleted much of my article: Laytongku, following some rules and suggestions from Wikipedia but also since I do not want this article to read as a personal experience even though my reason for creating it was for personal reasons. Placing Laytongku on the world map or or at least on Wikipedia indicating that it exists and may not exist for long due to governmental and Christian missionaries pressure to either convert them to christianity or to remove all inhabitants, not only the Telakan Karen of the village of Laytongku but all the existing villages, burn and/or destroy their villages and drive them into refugee camps along with hundreds of thousands of other Karen animists among them many fleeing from Burma into Thailand and who have been forced to convert to Christianity by an organization led by an ex-Green Beret Special Forces radical fanatic Baptist with his own army, though not supported by either the Myanmar or Thai Governments. Since my time is valuable and I have other interests please either publish my article or give me further guidelines as to how to make it worthy of your consideration. I have done all I can manage and need to concentrate not on Wikipedia, which is taking up too much of my time, but to my further research and additions to my essay: My Experience and Knowledge Living among the Telakan Karen Tribesmen of the Village of Laytongku, which is more important then any Wikipedia article. Thank you. Now what do you want considering my latest chopping edit of LAYTONGKU? Thank you, Palukiwa/Tzaims Luksus, FRSAPalukiwa (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

As I have advised you before, your efforts to publish a WP article on this subject are unlikely to succeed. You should definitely concentrate your efforts elsewhere. A big step would be to have your thesis, or an article based on your thesis, published in an appropriate professional journal.

As for the "chopped" article, it still contains too much content generally or specifically referenced to your (unpublished) thesis, so this material cannot be accepted in a WP article. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia article or Oxford D.Phil Essay/Thesis?

My Wikipedia article does not resemble my D.Phil Essay: My Experience and Knowledge Living Among the Telakan Karen Tribesmen in the Village of Laytongku, which in part is in the Library of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford University but also planned to be sent to The Siam Society. No to explain why I call it a D.Phil essay. I am a life Fellow of the Royal society of Art and the designation FRSA is a higher degree then any university degree so therefore as a Fellow of the RSA and having read Medieval Studies in conjunction for a D.Phil, which I didn't actually need since I was elected a Fellow of the RSA long before I read for a D.Phil in Medieval Studies at St. Edmund Hall...it was superflulous to consider seeking any kind of degree after receiving a FRSA. So my paper, essay, thesis, or actually a book on the subject would be extremely personal account and that is not the case concerning what I have written as an article for Wikipedia...only indicating a geographical location for the village of Laytongku...I only added it had some connection with my essay since Wikipedia wanted something to find in relation to what I wrote. Well quite frankly there is nothing anywhere that refers to the village of Laytongku...it just doesn't exist other then in YouTube sites on the Internet and I do not wish to guide anyone to them. A few personal articles dealing with government abuse of the Burmese Karen, some info without naming Laytongku concerning removal of the inhabitants of the UNESCO Wildlife Heritage sites an massive Christian missionaries insisting that unless the Karen animists convert to christianity they can not receive any medical assistance...much like the rules of Wikipidea...do it this way or else! Fine...'or else.' It matter little if at all.

I have deleted much of my article...all having been added to suit wikipedia but not me. I do not want my personal information, opinions...though I have many...nor controversal information that I have first hand knowledge of in the article...I hardly mention anything in any book, encyclopedia or even my own essay in the Laytongku article. I am happy to know that photos and maps are not necessary...I don't want to have them included in the article. A simple mention that the village of Laytongku exists and that the Telakan Karen have lived there for centuries som information about their animist faith and the location coordinates is fine...nothing more. No pertinent information coming from any other source is available or acceptable to cite. If what I have left of the article still has personal experience or opinions still within it then I am happy to go over the content and remove all that I believe to be so. I believe the first part describing the location of Laytongku is all that is necessary...history et al below is not of any importance to me to be included. I thank you for your assistance and where to look for what...however, I do not have time to go so are into it since I do not intend to become adept in Wikipedia functions after, or if in fact my article is accepted, to go further with Wikipedia. This has already taken more time then I ever planned for this really simple article which seems from a mole hill has turned into a mountain. Thank you again, Palukiwa/Tzaims Luksus, FRSAPalukiwa (talk) 21:42, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

The Article: Laytongku has been largely deleted. Is this an acceptable format?

I have deleted all but the main info concerning Laytongku, Climate/Temperature and Geography with incite references mainly from the Thungyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary, UNESCO and Wildlife Heritate site. I have no material concerning anything dealing with the inhabitants of the village and therefore no sources to cite are necessary or available. Laytongku village is a relatively unknown place with nothing important to cite ...I have no intention of adding anything more. No photos or maps. I hope this suits the requirements that Wikipedia wants and need to add it to their articles available to the public. If not then please advise what more I need to delete. I would like to end this discourse and debate ASAP. Thank you. Yours, Palukiwa/Tzaims Luksus, FRSAPalukiwa (talk) 22:03, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Why not?

If I were not a gentleman I would advise jmcgnh what he should do as he advises me and says in so many words: "My efforts to publish an article on the subject of Laytonku are (is) unlikely to succeed." Really why. As it now exists in a draft folder...it is simplified down to basic statistics...nothing but indications of UNESCO, wildlife Sanctuaries, and locations along with climate, geography and coordinates of Latitude and Longitude...nothing persona or informational that requires sources to cite. Perfect for public info especially since there isn't any source to cite or information available on this remote and totally unknown village called Laytongku. Is the present draft acceptable and if not what else should I delete since nothing is recommended that I add by the authorities, or especially jmcgnh. Yours, Palukiwa/Tzaims Luksus, FRSAPalukiwa (talk) 22:31, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse, Palukiwa. I commend you for removing the original research from your draft. However, what remains is entirely unreferenced, which violates our core content policy of verifiability. Please read Referencing for beginners, and add inline references verifying where you got the information in your draft article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry if my advice seemed a bit harsh, but I have been trying to help you with the article for some considerable time and have come to have the impression that you are not listening to, or not understanding, what I, and other editors, have been trying to tell you. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:45, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Palukiwa, there is no need to start a new thread every time you write here. Just add to the existing discussion. Further, we put very little credence in your academic credentials, because we have no way to know that you are who you say you are. Nor do we care. Please stop adding your whole name and whatever the post nominal alphabet soup is. Don't explain, we don't care. We are all volunteers here, and posting multiple threads, one after another, seems like you are being very demanding. Please source your article to reliable sources independent of the subject and yourself, place your sources inline for everyone's ease. If you need technical assistance with how to do an inline citation, feel free to ask (in this thread - do not start another). Once you've sourced your draft to reliable sources and provided inline citation, feel free to come back to this thread and ask one of us to review it. PhD, FAC, Lld, dint matter much here. All that matters is "can you contribute properly sourced encyclopedic content to the encyclopedia." We are here to help you learn how. Learning is however a partnership. If you can't listen, we can't help you. John from Idegon (talk) 02:12, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

OK?

Thanks for the help. My page, Laytonkgu is my article. I will keep it as it is. See you later. PalukiwaPalukiwa (talk) 02:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I assume that Wikipedi acknowledges that the article/page Laytongku is my property and will prevent any other from create it. Perhaps I will decide to spend the next ten years figuring out your instructions but for now I have too many more important issues in my life that take priority.

Thank you for the trouble all of you have spent giving me instructions that are incomprehensible to follow and I appreciate finding out what it involves creating an article. I will restrain myself from creating any new ones...I think anything more that might be said best be left unsaid and unthought. Cheers!

Also forgive me for not understanding computer language...I have a basic knowledge but I don't feel the computer an important part of my life and/or work. End of discussion. PalukiwaPalukiwa (talk) 02:57, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Please see WP:OWN. The page is not "your property". -A lad insane (Channel 2) 03:03, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Palukiwa, it is most unambiguously NOT your article and never was and anyone can edit it any way they choose. When you signed up for your account and each and every time you pressed the "save changes" button, you agreed to that. John from Idegon (talk) 03:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

NO, Palukiwa, it is not your article in any sense, and it appears that you simply do not get what Wikipedia is all about. Any editor is entirely free to modify and improve your article at any time. That is a core Wikipedia principle and you are obligated to accept it. A lot of experienced editors have spent a lot of time explaining how things work here in recent days. Please do not behave like a prima donna. That is not pretty. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Whether you understand the guidelines or not is irrelevant, new users are not expected to, the issue is that you don't understand the fundamental point of what wikipedia is. Which is making it impossible for you to understand the process. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 11:39, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I thoroughly understand what Wikipedia is all about and I am not acting like a 'prima donna' but just trying to create a proper article for Wikipedia on a subject (geographic location) that is not very well known or documented in referenced sources. You are all strangers to me and I appreciate that you have offered things for me to search for the information I need to create an article. I tend to be scholarly when dealing with any kind of written work, it is my nature, I am not a journalist, editor of any kind of periodical, newspaper or journal. Wikipedia offers many different suggestions for learning how to be an editor, creating an article and many other places to click on for informaiton. I have checked many out but found I didn't understand the nomenclature enough to actually put any of it to use and so I decided to join or start a discussion at the Teahouse, hoping to find a quick and easy directive to understand the language of Wikipedia. I am not trying to be difficult but just hopeful that there is a very simple directive to bring my article: Laytongku my contribution. When I claim Laytongku, the article is my property I merely indicate that I initiated it and was the original source for its existance on Wikipedia. You cannot deny me that fact at least. I also understand if any one adds information that I wish not to be included that I can delete or edit it as the originator and creator of the article. I would prefer not to be called names as I do not believe this is a friendly or gentlemanly manner in witch to gain any progress toward my success in finding the necessary elements to make my article credible and acceptable. There is very little published indicating Laytongku and what is available seems not accepted by Wikipedia guidelines for source citing. I hesitated using recent articles from The Nation and/or The Bangkok Post since they are not appealing news items in my opinion, however, the name Leytongku (another way Laytongku is spelled-there are many different spelling in English, French, Thai and Burmese) since at least the name of the village is mentioned that may be a reliable source to cite so I added them hoping this will suffice at least some sort of source acceptable. If not thenI am not sure I will find any book or encyclopedia where the name of the village is mentioned anywhere. I removed the coordinates that I added since they were from my own knowledge/research witch could not be sourced but in the Bangkok Post and the nation a further geographic location is mentioned as: the Tambon Mae Chan area of Umphang. Although in my article the term: Umphang Wildlife Sanctuary is printed in "red' I assure you that this sanctuary actually exists in that area since it appears on official maps printed by the Thai Government and that I have as a guide to the area. In the Thai language I am not able to offer this as a source. The only geographic and/or climate/weather source I found, only for the area where the village exists, was in the Wikipedia article entitled: Thungyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary which seem primarily sourced or created by Buergin, Reinard who writes extensively concerning the Telakan villages struggle to survive in the World Heritage Site set up by UNESCO in 1991. Other then my own research, experience and knowledge, which is not accepted by wikipedia, I have no other source material to offer. I have reduced the article drastically since 90 percent of it was written by me from what I personally know and have researched. Perhaps one day that research if published will be acceptable for Wikipedia but in the meantime don't see that I can add any more to the article and it seems apparent that no one at wikipedia ever heard of the village of Laytongku which doesn't surprise me since few have. Please let us not argue or call one another names. PalukiwaPalukiwa (talk) 17:00, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Palukiwa, just to point out that you are incorrect when you state that "if any one adds information that I wish not to be included that I can delete or edit it as the originator and creator of the article". Starting an article does not give you to right to remove material subsequently added. Article content is decided by consensus, not by the creator of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I seem to have been misguided originally when I began my artifle: Laytongku since I was led to believe I could monitor it if any one added to it so as to keep it clean, however, since all the various discussions at the Teahouse I realize perhaps I made a mistake in creating the article. So be it since now it is too late as I have made people aware of the existence of this unknown village. I named the article: LAYTONGKU since that is its official name as located at the entrance of the village. The spelling: Leytongku is generally as it is referred to in French with the (accent aegue left off) language and for some reason it is spelled that way in the Bangkok Post and therefore copied by editors, journalists of The Nation. Properly it is Lay Tong Ku and the world for village is Ban making it Ban Lay Tong Ku or simply as the village marker reads: "LAYTONGU VILLAGE". I've been there so I know first hand and made special effort to call it what the villagers/and/Thai Government claim it should be spelled officially in English...I believe Wikipedia is an English speaking organization or at least I seem to recall that all articles should be written in English so renaming it Leytongku, regardless of what any newspaper might do would not be correct. I believe I am right in this am I not..at least right on one simple issue? As far as getting a replacement for a source other then Thungyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary I am not certain that is possible for climate/geography but I will search what information I might have in my files. I am happy that the article will abide by strict encyclopedic information and not radical Christian Missionary accounts or opinons which I have found to be the most detrimental elements that the villagers of the Telakan Karen or any and all Karen face continually...a war against being forced to convety from their animist or animist-Buddhist faith to Baptist Christianity...this is the principal element that has caused war and genocide for the Karen both in Burma (Myanmar) and Thailand. Since nothing that I might know or have researched is allowed in the article then I suppose nothing anyone else knows or has researched is allowed either so if that is the case then my article: Laytongku is safe from others twisting or bending information to suit their own personal purpose or interests.Palukiwa (talk) 17:35, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I am happy to admit that my assessment was wrong about your chances of getting a Laytongku article accepted. I believe it is very nearly there. I too am sad that it has been reduced to such a small nubbin, but only material for which we can find suitable sources can be in the article.

The policy regarding the name of the article following what the sources call the subject is called WP:COMMONNAME. I'm afraid it would override your choice unless we can get a consensus from other editors to retain your preferred spelling. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:01, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

To clarify the correct spelling of the name in English and constantly used by the Thai Government it is LAYTONGKU so you might want to search Google and Bing by typing LAYTONGKU as your search. There you will find many sites that also use the proper and acceptable spelling title: Laytongku..in various sites and maps it has been spelled LayTongKu or Lay Tong Ku and as I mentioned the French spell it Leytongku. What French influence may be indicated in the writers/journalists of the Bangkok Post, which must either be copied from The Nation or vice versa (as newspapers always copy from one another often with incorrect information and/or spellings) I feel it unjustified to rename my article from my original spelling and therefore keep it spelled LAYTONGKU. I hope we don't have to argue every tiny point since I feel very threatened by many of you rather then accepted by what appear, sorry in my opinion, a very haughty and dominating kind of attitude among contributors in the Tea House..."Just what have you all been drinking?" [quote from: James Cameron's movie: AVATAR.] "The juice that make the British bold?" [Quote from: Henry Purcell's Opera: KING ARTHUR] Sorry for my (overlooked) typos in earlier missives. LOL-Laughing Out Loud & LOL-Lots Of Luki, sorry again but you are all so amusing. ThanksPalukiwa (talk) 18:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I too am sorry that the article: LAYTONGKU has been reduced to such a degree but since there is nothing written given the name but only general information referring to Karen and Telakan Karen villages in the area of the Thungyai Naresuan Wildlife Sanctuary Wikipedia article and in it Buergin does not indicate any names of villages in that UNESCO area simply I suppose in order not to draw attention to the villagers since they are undergoing a struggle to remain in their villages and have to submit to extreme new government ordinances to live in harmony with the forest sanctuary which is threatening their survival to grow rice in their fields to sustain themselves...it is presently a very explosive and sensitive area just having been relieved by a 'cease fire' agreement between the Myanmar and Thai governments...I almost dared not even begin a Wikipedia article on this particular village or even mention it to anyone because of this, however, I felt giving credence to the village worldwide in a reasonable content in Wikipedia it might help the Telakan Karen villagers to remain living their villages in the forest sanctuary where their ancestors have lived for centuries. My own reasons are to assist and preserve their way of life and not further alter it. I am a NPR (no particular religion) and am supportive of their animist faith as they live and practice it. I found my best effort is to supply them with a pain relieving surgical dressing to relieve them from cuts and bruises which they often suffer from their work in the jungle and rice fields. I am also interested to learn more of their belief since I believe within animism (believing that all things have a soul is the basis of all other religions). I realize this is of no interest to any of you nor am I of any importance to you in any way, however, I am very protective of the village and villagers and also my article: Laytongku. I have another three sources that mention the name Laytongku that could be used and accepted as proper sources to cite. They use the spelling Laytongku as well so I will look over my files for them and add them for consideration. Also please note: as per the comment claiming that my article contains personal information is now not the case since I have removed all of my own personal content even the coordinates of Latitude and Longitude since that was from my own source and not found anywhere else exactly as I listed it.Palukiwa (talk) 18:39, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

In regard to the spelling of Laytongku. It is spelled with an 'a' by the Thai Government. It also is spelled Laytongku on the village marker when entering the village. Google and Bing have several sites that are listed as Laytongku and Lay Tong Ku/LayTongKu. the only possibility that the French spelling appears in the Bangkok Post and 'The Nation' is possibly due to their research from French sources that spell it with an 'e' and accent ague. This is a spelling error on their part It be a unfortunate for my article Laytongku since any Google or Bing search would perhaps not easily be found and I would appreciate that no change to the spelling is made as I was careful to make the decision to spell it as it is generally found in situ. Search Laytongku on Google and Bing and you will fine the spelling I use is the universally accepted spelling and proper one. I also believe comment no.3 on my Draft-Laytongku no longer has any of my personal material as I have deleted all but general information. Thank you,Palukiwa (talk) 20:27, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Please don't continue pointless discussion here. If you want to discuss the draft, the place to discuss it is at Draft talk:Laytongku. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:39, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

How to change description of occupation.

Hello. I have been working on the Alessandro Safina article. Whomever started the article tagged him above the info box as an "Italian Opera Singer", I would like to change to Italian Tenor, because he's not really an opera singer. I can't figure out how to edit that area. I appreciate your help. GrammerCracker96 (talk) 02:14, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, GrammerCracker96. I have looked at our article Alessandro Safina, and do not see this designator "Italian Opera Singer" in either desktop view or mobile view. I see him described as "Italian operatic pop tenor". Perhaps you are viewing the article on an app tailored to Android or Apple that displays content from Wikidata. I find that using the desktop site on Android devices gives me the best user experience. It is like editing Wikipedia on a miniature desktop computer, and I do 98% of my editing that way. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:35, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thank you. That is exactly what I was doing.I appreciate your guidance. GrammerCracker96 (talk) 09:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@GrammerCracker96: I've updated the description in Wikidata to "Italian tenor" to match the content in the article, so it should now display correctly in mobile view. Let me add, though, that I agree with Cullen328 regarding using the desktop site on cellphones – it's way better than the mobile interface.

–FlyingAce^✈hello 22:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)