Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 675

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 670

←

Archive 673

→

Why is my article not considered notable enough?

Upon review, my article was rejected for two reasons: (1) appearing to be news report of single event and (2) event not notable enough.

You can view my submission here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brent.ancap/sandbox

(1) The article used multiple news sources over the period as reference for the specific details of the event, but the article itself was not intended to be a news report.

(2) As to the event's notability, as far as power outages are concerned, the criteria listed on this page of major power outages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_major_power_outages), is as follows:

"This is a list of notable wide-scale power outages. To be included, the power outage must conform to all of the following criteria:

The outage must not be planned by the service provider. The outage must affect at least 1,000 people and last at least one hour. There must be at least 1,000,000 person-hours of disruption."

My article refers to power outage that meets all these requirements. I understand that those requirements refer only to adding an event on that specific page, but I thought that there was enough reference material out there to justify a more detailed account of the Gisborne power outage in the form of an article.

New Zealand national and local media reported on the event for over three days as well.

Brent.ancap (talk) 20:18, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Brent.ancap. It is well-reported but does fall under single event. An accident caused a power outage which was handled in the normal manner. The smallest outage I can see in List of major power outages that has its own article is New York City blackout of 1977. Not only did that one involve a very large city, it resulted in widespread looting, vandalism, and arson as well as massive arrests. StarryGrandma (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Brent.ancap, and welcome to the Teahouse! I read through your draft article, and while I think you have done a good job with it, I unfortunately agree with the assessment of the reviewer (and StarryGrandma). The criteria listed on List of major power outages is only used for inclusion within that particular article; in order for an event to be considered notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia as a standalone article (versus as content within a larger article), it must pass the criteria outlined in WP:EVENT, specifically:

Lasting effect—a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance
Geographical scope—significant impact over a wide region, domain, or widespread societal group
Depth of coverage—coverage must be significant and not in passing, which typically includes analysis that puts events into context, such as is often found in books, feature length articles in major news magazines, and TV news specialty shows
Duration of coverage—coverage beyond a relatively short news cycle
Diversity of sources—significant national or international coverage

Although 33 hours is a bit longer than most power outages, there is nothing to indicate that the above criteria will be met, especially given the relatively small number of people affected (40,000). A few national news outlets did pick up the story, but I do not see this having any lasting significance, as it appears to be a relatively normal outage with no real aftereffects. I agree with StarryGrandma that it would have been something very normal for the power company to restore, and while regrettable, the accident that caused it would not be considered notable by itself either. I hope this helps! CThomas³ (talk) 05:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Although I'm a bit disappointed in the wasted effort, I'm willing to acquiesce in the outcome given your responses. I appreciate you guys taking the time the answer my question. I'll take this experience as a learning opportunity to spend some time thoroughly reading through Wikipedia recommendations on acceptability, etc. (which I should've done beforehand!).

Cheers.

PS - I'll probably publish my little article with references on my blog -- Brent.ancap (talk) 06:17, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Brent.ancap, thanks for your understanding attitude. I hope you stick around and edit stuff that interest you! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

That sounds like a great idea, Brent.ancap. Thank you for your efforts in writing the article, and like Gråbergs Gråa Sång I very much hope you stay and contribute! Any of us here at the Teahouse would be happy to help with questions on subject notability (or most anything else, for that matter), so if you have questions or something in the policies doesn't make sense, please feel free to come back and ask. CThomas³ (talk) 15:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Newspaper as a reference

Hello everyone. I have been asked to assist with an article and would like some advice; this is the scenario I was presented with..

I have a photocopy of a foreign newspaper article (actually 3 separate newspapers) from the 1950's that I want to use as a reference. The newspaper is not digitized so I can't link to the article. And I don't think I can upload it to Wikimedia Commons because of copyright issues. The information will likely be contested so I want to make the source(s) available.

Any thoughts on the best way to proceed? Doctor^G (talk) 15:14, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Doctorg: here is what I would recommend.

Add references to the foreign newspapers, giving for each the name of the newspaper, the date of the issue, the page and maybe column number, and the name of the journalist. If the information is contested, upload an image of the photocopy to a web site (not Wikipedia) that is willing to host such images, and tell the contesters its URL. Or, if the illegality of that worries you, email the image to the contesters. Maproom (talk) 15:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Doctorg and welcome to the Teahouse.

Offline sources are acceptable. Just put in the complete bibliographic information so someone could look up the article in question: name of newspaper, city where published, date, page, etc. If all you have is a clipping without any details about where it was published, I'm afraid it cannot be used as a reference. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 15:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, I thought of those ideas as well, but just wanted to use this as a sounding board. I also thought about having the editor contact the newspapers again and ask for their permission to upload to Wikimedia Commons. I'll pass this along and help them out. Thanks again! Doctor^G (talk) 15:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

No, Doctorg, uploading is not required, and not usually appropriate. The point of a reference is that a reader should be able to find and consult it they need to: it's perfectly acceptable for them to have to subscribe to something, or to order it from a major library. What the reference must do is give sufficient bibliographic information that they can in principle locate it and order a copy. Unless the source is primarily a web site, then an online link is never ever ever required: it's simply a courtesy to make things easier for the reader. --ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Maproom, sorry, your post is directions to violate copyright, and of course, any link to the copyright violation that would be created thereby is barred for use per WP:ELNEVER. Doctorg: please disregard that advice.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Draft:Firstdub

It keeps getting reject because 'because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia'.

How can i demonstrate this? Brixjon (talk) 16:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Brixjon: by have the article cite reliable independent published sources with in-depth discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 17:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Brixjon, and welcome to the Teahouse. On Wikipedia, everything we write must be cited to a reliable source (click here to read what Wikipedia considers a reliable source). To establish a subject's notability click here to learn how notability is defined on Wikipedia), you need at least two, but preferably 3–6, reliable sources that are independent of the subject (so interviews, self-published books, the subject's own website, etc. don't count) and that cover the subject in some detail — more than a passing mention. Sources you'e looking for should ideally resemble this piece at ANightInThe6ix.com (click)... except that that page is a blog post, and blogs are not considered reliable sources.

To be frank, Brixjon, I looked for any reliable sources, on both Google and Google News, and found nothing about Firstdub. If there are no reliable sources giving appropriate coverage, then there can't be a Wikipedia article. But that may be temporary; reliable news outlets may take notice and write about Firstdub in the future. In the meantime, there are lots of other music industry entities you could write about, including existing Wikipedia articles you could edit. Creating a new article is actually one of the hardest things to do here, so you may find it easier to get that eventual Firstdub article accepted if you have more editing experience under your belt. Good luck! —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 18:13, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Contribution count on user page

I like to edit Wikipedia articles and I want to display how many times I contributed on my user page, but my current solution of putting a number and replacing it every once in a while is horrible. Anyone have a solution?Contraption5000 (talk) 10:24, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

@Contraption5000: No there is no way to show the LIVE no. of edit counts on userpage instead of manually editing them, but your can put link of your contribution page on your userpage. – 1997 kB 11:00, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't know exactly what it is but I have seen other users have such information on their page, possibly as a template. Perhaps another user here knows what it is. 331dot (talk) 11:12, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

@Contraption5000: There is a userbox that updates automagically, User:UBX/LiveEditCounter, but it breaks down when your count gets into the tens of thousands. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:11, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I state a range, as in Currently I am between 3,000 and 4,000 edits. David notMD (talk) 00:46, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

You might be able to find a different box by searching Wikipedia:Userboxes. I have one that says "this user has made over 15,000 contributions to Wikipedia". You adjust the number manually. Most people seem to update only every thousand edits. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 20:47, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Referencing

I am finding it really hard to work out how to in-put references into articles. (I have looked at the referencing for beginners page on Wikipedia. I need help please.'DesoHaa (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi 'DesoHaa. Look at User:Yunshui/References for beginners for a much shorter help page. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi DesoHaa! In case you're overwhelmed by the syntax give ProveIt a try. - - Kaartic ^{correct me, if i'm wrong} 19:04, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I think Kaartic meant to link to Wikipedia:ProveIt. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:06, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Yeah. I mistakenly thought that WP:PROVEIT was shortcut for Wikipedia:PreoveIt due to the presence of the former in the latter page. I missed the fact that it was a disambiguation link :-( Anyways, thank for correcting, Cordless Larry - - Kaartic ^{correct me, if i'm wrong} 05:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you guys! I finally worked it out!'DesoHaa (talk) 22:43, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Upload photo in info box

Hello Im trying to upload this photo in the info box on the page im making and i cant seem to get up on there. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Ursula_Hayden.webp Can you please help me?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kindness33 (talk • contribs)

Hi Kindness33. An infobox is a template and if you navigate to the template page most will have documentation. Here, the tempate in question is Template:Infobox person – {{Infobox person}} – which explains that you would add the image name next to:

| image =

without including the prefix File:" or "Image:" By the way, you need to remove this code:  from around entries. That was not supposed to be copied, and it tell the software to hide whatever's placed in between. Also, on talk page and discussion forums like this (but never in articles), please remember to sign you posts. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:51, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Images

Hello! Can anyone help me on how to incorporate images in an article?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aggelisant (talk • contribs)

Hi Aggelisant. If you mean how to add an existing, free photo to a page (e.g., one already uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons), then the mechanics of placing it for display can be read at the Wikipedia:Picture tutorial, but the most basic markup is [[File:Name of image.extension|thumb|Caption to display below image]].

If you mean how to upload a photo for use here, that is exquisitely context-dependent, related to its copyright status. What photo?; of a living or deceased person?; taken by whom and under what circumstances?; when?; was it published or unpublished and if published in what, when?; in what country?; with any explicit details of copyright status?; and on and on. However, I have in the past posted here a sort of primer, covering some of the ground rules, that I'll post below a in the hope it might be informative, but if you provide contextual details a much more tailored answer can likely be provided. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Image copyright rules of thumb

Any image you find you must assume to be fully non-free copyrighted, and cannot be used here unless you have affirmative and verifiable evidence of copyright status that makes it usable here. This excludes a vast cross section of images you find on the Internet, and through a Google image search.
Usable images are those which are either in the public domain, or bear a suitably-free copyright license (meaning the image is copyrighted, but is permitted to used on a very unrestricted basis, that is as free or freer than the licenses borne by most of Wikipedia's content). A list of suitably-free copyright licenses can be viewed here.
"Public domain" is often misunderstood as meaning publicly posted or publicly used, which have little bearing. It means that the copyright of the image has been affirmatively released by its owner into the public domain (e.g., the owner so states in relation to the image), or it has passed into the public domain because of some situational status, such as that it was not subject to copyright in the first place (e.g., an image created by a U.S. federal employee during the scope of his or her duties), or because of timing, coupled with publication status—which can be summarized as the image being:
- Created/photographed prior to 1897 (whether published or not) = PD.
- Published before 1923 = PD — but only in the U.S. Wikimedia Commons images must be suitably-free also in the country of origin, so for foreign images, you must check its source country's copyright rules, and if not PD there, it can be uploaded to Wikipedia, but not to the Commons.
- Published after 1923 and up to 1977 without a copyright symbol = PD
- Published between 1978 and March 1, 1989 without a copyright symbol and not registered since = PD
- Published from 1923 to 1963 with a copyright symbol and copyright not renewed = PD
- Unpublished and created/taken before 1923 = PD 70 years after author's death (so the author's identity must be known).
- Unpublished and created/taken after 1923 = too complicated to get into.
Images that meet the above standards should be uploaded to our sister site, the Wikimedia Commons, and not locally, so all Wikimedia projects have access to the image. Images at the Commons can be displayed here natively.
There is a strict and limited exception to the above, which is that non-free images can be used under a claim of fair use, but they must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria. Such images cannot be uploaded to the Commons, but only locally (to Wikipedia). Rules of thumb for that are also complex and I don't think it would be useful to go into them unless you respond with specifics of what image you are looking to use, and it seems a fair use exception might be applicable. Just note one exclusion that covers a lot of terrain: For the most part, non-free photographs of anyone who is alive cannot meet fair use standards at all.
You can use an advanced Google Images search to try to locate suitably-free images. Once there, go to Settings → Advanced → usage rights → Free to use, share or modify, even commercially. Flickr is also a ripe place to search for free images, but please be aware of "license laundering".
You might try the "FIST", Free Image Search Tool.

Adding info to an article about me

All I was trying to do is add some info about what I do as a musician and with regard to my weight loss (which has been covered on the internet, TV, print, and radio), with 3 links, two to music and one to a TEDx talk. All are me and my compositions, so there's no copyright problem. It just give a clearer picture, if the articles going to be there anyway. However, the changes were undone, and the article reverted. It's pretty neutral information. How do I get the changes to stick? Thanks for your help. Medonnelly (talk) 05:19, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Medonnelly, welcome to the Treehouse, unfortunately you’ve made a common mistake in that we can’t accept links to Facebook or YouTube as reliable sources, please see WP:LINKSTOAVOID. Also another mistake you have made is to edit an article about yourself. Wikipedia discourages people to edit articles on themselves, please see WP:COI. NZ Footballs Conscience^(talk) 05:31, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, Medonnelly. The article in question is Mark Donnelly. Your additions were reverted by a bot. There are two problems with your edit. First of all, editing your own biography is strongly discouraged and will be subjected to heightened scrutiny. I recommend that you do not try that. Secondly, you used YouTube videos as sources. Wikipedia is very strict about copyright, and we consider a large percentage of YouTube videos to be copyright violations when used on Wikipedia. Please read WP:YOUTUBE. We also do not accept Facebook posts as sources, since by definition, they have no professional editorial control. I suggest that you post any suggested additions at Talk: Mark Donnelly, providing links to reliable sources that do not present copyright problems. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

garage door identity

My electric motor for auto open and closing of the garage door is only marked with INTEL Doors. I would like to know which company this is that manufactures these. Yours Allan Allanandmary (talk) 06:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

AllanandmaryWelcome to the Teahouse @ Wikipedia, unfortunately this is not the correct place to post your question .You may consider asking the Reference desk this question.Also your name seems to imply shared use. This is not encouraged on wikipedia. Please create separate accounts for both allan and mary if both are interested --Forceradical (talk) 06:49, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

best practice for article title renaming

what is the best practice for renaming the title of an article i.e. from "Weaver" to "Sigourney Weaver"?

Do I (A) Rename the "old" article, then create "new" article with "old name" and redirect it to the "new" article or (B) do I create a “new” article with the "new" name copy the content from the "old" article and then redirect the "old" article to the "new" one? 76.91.218.44 (talk) 07:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi IP, the best practice is to ask on the talk page of the article you'd like to be renamed. Article title renaming is done through moving the article, which keeps the attribution intact -- There'sNoTime ^{(to explain)} 08:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Weaver is a perfectly acceptable disambiguation page, and absolutely should not be renamed Sigourney Weaver, which is about a specific person instead of a broad group of topics. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

What is causing the indented margins on this page (article)?

I cannot figure out what is causing this article to be indented several inches to the right:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_vs._Derwinski

Thanks in advance for your help! - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

The overall article has the same margins as any other on Wikipedia. The indented text in the Analysis section I presume you mean is intentionally coded as a blockquote,

like this.

This is to make it obvious what part of the overall text is a quote, without resorting to italics, quotation marks or other expedients. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.115.180 (talk) 09:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I just realized that it has to be a problem on my end as I'm seeing it on other Wikipedia articles. My bad. Sorry for the bother. - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 10:02, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

New Article

I've been writing my first article Draft:Rosa 'Constance Spry' and although it was meant to go through articles for creation, I seem to have lost the submit button. Its ready to go, and I've worked out how to move it out of draft space, but not sure if I should. Can anyone help, by saying yes, its ok, or getting back the submit button so it can go through the review process?Curdle (talk) 08:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

@Curdle: I have submitted your draft to the WP:AFC process (i.e. via the same process as the "submit" button). (It is not so poor that it would get rejected outright, and I am not so sure of notability that I would move it to mainspace immediately; I am reasonably optimistic though.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

It has been reviewed and moved to mainspace now. Α Guy into Books™ § (Message) - 10:48, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

- @Tigraan: Thankyou. well..its a notable rose, if you're into that area, but I did wonder how wikipedia would see it, so thought I would give it a try. And thankyou to everyone else ! Curdle (talk) 11:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Conflict re CPAP device invention or introduction

Dear staff at Wikipedia These two articles in Wikipedia seem to be in confict:

In 1980, Professor Colin Sullivan invented the first continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine, regarded today as the “gold standard” in sleep apnea treatment. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ResMed

The company introduced the first continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine for the treatment of sleep apnea in 1985. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Respironics Fred weiers (talk) 13:56, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Fred weiers, and welcome to the Teahouse! Looking at the articles you quoted, and that of Professor Sullivan, I believe the timeline is that the professor invented the machine in 1980, then in 1985 Respironics were first to bring a commercial product to market, while ResMed introduced their version in 1989. The confusion may be because the ResMed article mentions Professor Sullivan's invention and the date. I'm not sure that's actually relevant in there because it might imply he has some connection with the company but I don't think that's actually the case, judging from the references. Neiltonks (talk) 14:35, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Does this count as encyclopedia content?

Hello, I have a question about what counts as encyclopedia content. Giraitė is a suburb in the outskirts of Kaunas (Lithuania's 2nd largest city). A very large portion of housing projects in Giraitė are done by companies connected to a famous Lithuanian mobster. Could this piece of information belong on Giraitė's Wikipedia page? The mobster in question has his own Wiki page and links between him and the growth of the suburb are well documented. Casus fortuitus (talk) 14:04, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Casus fortuitus, and welcome to the Teahouse. It certainly could be, but given that this is both a potentially controversial fact and related to a biography of a living person, we must be extra careful in our treatment of this information. The question to ask in this situation is, "Is this information relevant to the reader's understanding of the topic?" Is the activity in Giraitė influenced by the mobster's involvement in any way, or is the neighborhood otherwise normal, and anyone who didn't already know about the involvement wouldn't have any reason to suspect it? How closely related are the companies to the mobster (is he on the board of directors, for example, or just a minority investor)? Is he directly influencing the companies' activities? And if so, is this activity questionable in any way?
If the answers to the above questions are "yes", I would think that the content could be included as long as the analysis is referenced from multiple reliable sources (due to the potentially controversial nature of the material), and that the facts within the references are reported faithfully, ensuring a neutral point of view without any editorializing, synthesis, or other original research. Also be careful with potentially biased sources, and if you are using any of these, be sure to present any reliably sourced opposing points of view as well (properly weighting each of them, of course). I hope this helps. CThomas³ (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

How do I add an image from a medical journal?

Hi. I'd like to add an image from this medical journal ~ Rohrich, M.D, R., Smith, M.D., P., Marcantonio, M.D., D., & Kenkel, M.D., J. (n.d.). The zones of adherence: Role in minimizing and preventing contour deformities in liposuction. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 129(5S), 86S-93S. Retrieved from http://journals.lww.com/plasreconsurg/Documents/Updates_in_Aesthetic_Surgery_0512_Article.14.pdf ~ to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liposuction page. I'd appreciate guidance so I can do it correctly. Thank you!

Juliet Sabine (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC) Juliet Sabine, September 21, 2017 Juliet Sabine (talk) 00:26, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Juliet Sabine. That medical journal article has an unambiguous and prominent copyright notice, and presumably all of the images are copyrighted too. An image from that article could only be used on Wikipedia if you could convince the American Society of Plastic Surgeons to release the image in writing, under an acceptable Creative Commons license. While not impossible, I consider that to be highly unlikely. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your response, Cullen. I to consider it to be highly unlikely as well that the American Society of Plastic Surgeons would release the unflattering, life changing images to be used on the Liposuction Wikipedia page. I'm glad I asked here before trying to put the picture on the page. Much of the information and the photos on the Liposuction page go against true long-term outcomes and seem to make assumptions that are bandwagon theories, but go against science. A group of health care professionals, myself included, have been studying this subject for many years. I'm unsure at the moment what the best way is to proceed with making changes to provide the public with vital information. I have many journal sources. One that I posted yesterday got undone, and I asked why, but didn't get a clear, satisfactory answer. Clearly, there are people who have financial incentives for these procedures to continue. If we have releases from individuals to use photos of bad / tragic outcomes, may we use those, or do they have to be journal pictures? Juliet Sabine (talk) 02:45, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

It looks like an explanation for the revert was given in the edit summary used here, Juliet Sabine. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I see, it looks like they are saying that the researchers documented their own experience? Liposuction, (adipose removal), is proven to increase visceral fat, which negatively affects the pancreas and insulin resistance as well. I'll certainly continue on this Wikipedia learning curve. I appreciate the help! Juliet Sabine (talk) 06:20, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Well, they're documenting their own research, so it's a primary source, Juliet Sabine, whereas Wikipedia articles on medical topics should rely on secondary sources that report on the results of primary sources. Ideally, systematic reviews are the best sources here. See WP:MEDRS for more information. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:35, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Got it! Thank you so much! Juliet Sabine (talk) 06:41, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

I wanted to pop by and suggest that you consider learning from/working with the WikiProject Medicine, Juliet Sabine if you haven't already. You'd be joining other editors who share concerns you have about "bandwagon" theories and science. Shameran81 (talk) 18:50, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Just finished draft, but there is a redirect under the same name

I just finished Draft:One-Way Conversations, but a redirect is active under the same name. I want the draft to replace the redirect because it is an album for the artist being redirected to. Can I just submit my draft for review, or do I have to do something different to have it replace the redirect? Rhythm of Dawn (talk) 00:08, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Rhythm of Dawn, no you don't need to do anything about the title. The reviewer can handle that for you. However, you do need to remove the photo from the info box. Fair-use images are not allowed anywhere except in mainspace. I'm not all that well-versed on music articles, but your draft looks pretty solid to me. If you submit it and it passes, you can add the photo once the article is in mainspace. Unfortunately, fair-use images that are not in use on an article get deleted after a week's time. So you may have to upload it again. Keep up the good work. Ad I said, your draft looks pretty solid. John from Idegon (talk) 04:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

@John from Idegon: Thanks for letting me know. I have removed the cover art from the info box and submitted my draft. Rhythm of Dawn (talk) 20:57, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

response to racism?

Hello, if someone makes a racist comment on a wikipedia talk page, is there a community process for what to do next? (asking on assumption wikipedia does not let such posts stand; if that is wrong please let know). thanks 70.67.222.124 (talk) 15:06, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

There isn't a racism noticeboard, but egregious examples can be reported at the administrators noticeboard as being uncivil, disruptive or not here to build the encyclopedia. Kleuske (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

If a talk page post is a personal attack, vandalism or inappropriate under talk page guidelines, you can just remove it. Sometimes an IP will post something stupid and never return. White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Do unsigned mentions get sent?

I wanted to save an edit in my sandbox involving several user names. I didn't sign it. I quickly reverted it when I realized the other editors might get alerted. However, it's been several minutes and the mentions haven't been sent. Can I safely save the edits in my sandbox with the other user names without fear of them getting alerted as long as I don't sign? Huggums537 (talk) 02:39, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Huggums. They do not. As proof I'm not going to sign this post, and save, and will sign only in the next edit. You will get no ping.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hmm. Why didn't I think of that? Maybe I could have mentioned myself to test it... But, this didn't have the intended effect since you accidentally got my user name wrong, so it never actually alerted me anyway. I'm positive it would have worked the way you say it does though because those unsigned mentions that were in my sandbox still haven't been sent. However, you did answer a question I wondered about, which was if this works the same way outside the sandbox, and you "proved" that it does. P.S. No need to correct your mistake since I have this figured out now. Thanks for your help. Huggums537 (talk) 19:03, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Anytime Huggums537 (got your name right this time! but I will be signing so you should get a ping:-) On this issue, see Help:Fixing failed pings.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Ford Mondeo (fourth generation)

The reader should not see "Category:" here. Maybe an experienced user can fix it. Thanks.--Tim Stamper (talk) 21:50, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Tim Stamper, welcome to the Teahouse. I used {{Commons category|Ford Mondeo Mk V}} instead.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:00, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Simple solution if you know it.--Tim Stamper (talk) 22:03, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

User Profiles

In some user profiles they have tags that say "This user is..." or "This user does..." Today I stumbled across one that said, "This user is in school. This user may be away or inactive for varying periods of time, especially if they have exams. Although they may occasionally be able to do some editing, talk page messages might not receive a timely response. Note: this user is currently studying for or taking exams and so will be inactive for long periods of time." And another one that said, "Because of school, (Insert username here) will not be very active on weekdays, but should be back editing enthusiastically on weekends (except when doing homework or on vacation)." I want to add the two tags on my own profile, but how do I do that? Note that (Insert username here) is not an actual person. I just wanted to keep that user anonymous. Thanks for reading this. Thissecretperson (talk) 21:05, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

I'll bet you're looking for Template:Atschool. Does that help? 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thissecretperson, you will probably be interested in Wikipedia:Userboxes. 😉White Arabian Filly ^Neigh 21:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both for telling me this. Now I know what tags I can use for my profile. Thissecretperson (talk) 22:29, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

where is the sandbox? thanks

I cannot find the sandbox FighterMcKags 2.0 (talk) 20:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

FighterMcKags 2.0: it's at Wikipedia:Sandbox. Note that it frequently gets overwritten by other users, and cleared, so it's no use for anything you want to keep. Maproom (talk) 20:48, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

In addition to Wikipedia:Sandbox, if you are using a PC, you can go to the Sandbox button next to your username. I don't know what to do if you use a different device though. Thissecretperson (talk) 21:12, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, FighterMcKags 2.0. I do the vast majority of my editing using an Android smartphone and Wikipedia's desktop site. I have functional access to all of my sandbox pages, which I use frequently. The link to your own personal sandbox page (and then to any of your own personal sandbox subpages) is in the center of the top toolbar whenever you are logged in. You can use your sandbox pages for any purpose directly related to improving the encyclopedia. Ignore the generic community sandbox, since it is ephemeral. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:58, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Can I get help with a MoS question?

Can I get help w/a MoS question concerning commas?

Wikipedia's MoS says this about commas: "In geographical references that include multiple levels of subordinate divisions (e.g., city, state/province, country), a comma separates each element and follows the last element unless followed by other punctuation. Dates in month–day–year format require a comma after the day, as well as after the year, unless followed by other punctuation. In both cases, the last element is treated as parenthetical. Incorrect: He set October 1, 2011 as the deadline for Chattanooga, Oklahoma to meet his demands. Correct: He set October 1, 2011, as the deadline for Chattanooga, Oklahoma, to meet his demands."

Concerning the commas in dates in month-day-year formet, using this example from the Father Murphy page, "Father Murphy is an American western drama series that aired on the NBC network from November 3, 1981 to September 18, 1983."

The MoS says a comma is required after the year 1981:

"Father Murphy is an American western drama series that aired on the NBC network from November 3, 1981, to September 18, 1983."

Chicago, AP, APA & AMA says the same thing. All reputable sources agree - it's not ambiguous at all.

So why was my change reverted? It doesn't seem as if this is an optional comma; MoS says it's required; no exceptions are noted. What gives? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk • contribs)

IP is a likely sockpuppet of User:Hoggardhigh and has been reported for investigation. --‖ Ebyabe ^talk - State of the Union ‖ 06:10, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Hardly seems fair to point fingers when the question is legitimate and valid. 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk) 06:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Bottom line: can a grammarian help answer my question? Thanks for the help! 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk) 06:21, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your interpretation of the WP:MOS is correct; the comma would be required in that case. That being said, however, there are many who believe that too many commas in a row (even if "required") can interrupt the flow of the sentence. While I personally believe that it would be incorrect to simply remove the commas, often there is a way to rewrite the sentence and eliminate as many commas as possible. Failing that, it may be possible to least move them away from each other so that the comma parentheticals are longer than a single word. In the specific case above, I believe the comma can be safely added without causing undue disruption, but if you choose to re-add it, I would be much more specific about what you are doing and why. I hope this helps. CThomas³ (talk) 06:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks CThomas3! I undid the reversion with the expl not a serial comma but adding the 2nd half of the pair required for a non-restrictive appositive. If that gets reverted again: then what do I do to escalate the matter? 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk) 07:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Addendum: I am not qualified to comment on any potential WP:BLOCKEVASION, but that policy clearly states that any edits made by or on behalf of a blocked editor may be reverted, even helpful ones (though those are not required to be reverted). I am guessing, based upon Ebyabe's comments above, that it is not a misunderstanding of the MOS that caused your edits to be reverted. CThomas³ (talk) 07:01, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

EBY seems to think I'm a sock puppet - which I'm not. But regardless, to leave that sentrence as it stands is simply wrong. Where do I go with this for help? 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk) 07:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Exactly: where do I go to get help with this? I'm not a sock puppet, I'm a professor of English writing in so Calif, hardly have the time to be a sockpuppet. So now whaT? tHERE ARE THOUSANDS OF THESE MISSING (2ND) COMMAS & I JUST WANT TO REPAIR THEM. PULLING WOOL OVER SOMEONE'S EYES IS BENEATH ME. 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk) 07:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings again, 2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F. If you are not a sockpuppet, the best advice I can give you is to let the process work. Checkusers have some pretty sophisticated tools, and they will come to a definitive answer in relatively short order. Assuming you pass that hurdle, you will be free to edit, but if you do I highly encourage you to create an account. It is free and easy, keeps your IP anonymous, and avoids the extra scrutiny that edits from IP users undergo; wherever you fall on the continuum of the rightness or wrongness of that, it does happen and is something to take into consideration. CThomas³ (talk) 16:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

The use of all capitals on the Internet is considered shouting. In case you haven't noticed, professor, Wikipedia is a very large Internet project. Commas are hardly worth shouting over, even if there are real errors. Shouting about commas or about other trivial matters is a way to get negative attention. Just stop shouting. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

My apologies for having hit the capslock button inadvertently and for having offended others by that mistake.2605:E000:35C6:C200:C522:44A:E109:F43F (talk) 17:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for apologizing, IP editor. Not everyone is mature enough to do that. Let me also suggest that you create an account; had you done so, I would have been able to "ping" you (have Wikipedia notify you of a message next time you logged in or refreshed a page) so that you wouldn't have to keep visiting this page to see if there were further responses. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 04:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

draft page removed - why?

My *draft* bio of a living person was removed. The reason given was: (A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject). Since it was a draft why did this apply? MaryM1234 (talk) 04:53, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, MaryM1234. I see no deleted drafts or edits in your edit history, and no A7 notice on your talk page. Did you create this draft under another account, or as an IP editor? Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi MaryM1234. Assuming this is about Draft:Kal spelletich, you created it in the article mainspace, where it was tagged for speedy deletion under A7 before it was moved to the draft namespace – so you're right, it should not have been deleted on that basis thereafter. Regardless, it has not been tagged since you recreated it.

Can I ask why you're apparently using at least three different account names (User:MaryM1234, User:Marym1234 and User:Marylee1234)?

Cullen328: only found it by noticing another account with a similar name had edited the one page in this user's history.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know there are three different account names for me. I don't have any nefarious intentions. I only want one and I was under the assumption that it was Marylee1234. Now I need to find out how to remove the other accounts. thanks culllen328 MaryM1234 (talk) 22:20, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

As for Draft:Kal spelletich, MaryM1234, you have two immediate tasks if the draft is to be accepted as an article: Show that he meets our notability guideline for artists, and be sure that every substantive assertion is supported by a citation to a reliable, independent source. For example, the "Museum collections" section now lacks references. Every listing there needs a reference. Please read Referencing for beginners. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Cullen328 thanks for the guidance. Ahat is the time frame on these two tasks. You say immediately, but what does that mean? Marylee1234 (talk) 02:43, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, User:MaryM1234 / User:Marym1234 / User:Marylee1234, and welcome back to the Teahouse. I'm sure Cullen328 didn't mean to suggest you had a very short deadline to establish notability and cite reliable sources; in principle there is no deadline for completing a draft and submitting it for review, although drafts that have gone 6 months or more without being edited — if they are still unsubmitted — may be deleted to clear server space. So long as you're working on it semi-regularly, though, you have nothing to worry about. You will also have multiple opportunities to submit the draft if you don't get it right the first time... though you should never resubmit without fixing any problems the reviewer pointed out. Feel free to return to the Teahouse with any future questions you may have. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 03:31, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks GrammarFacist. Good to know the rough outlines of the timing. Marylee1234 (talk) 03:35, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Marylee1234. Please sign in consistently with your preferred account, and leave the other accounts alone for a while. Yes, "immediately" was too strong a word choice on my part, and I apologize for that. You can take your time, but please make these issues your highest priorities as you develop the draft article. Thank you very much. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:56, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Userboxes

Hello! This may seem like a lame question but... I tried to add userboxes to my user page and they didn't show up... any suggestions? Mossboss254 (talk)

Hello, Mossboss254, and welcome back to the Teahouse. You had inadvertently left a ) to be hidden except when viewing the code source of the page in question. Do keep in mind that while you're welcome to fancy up your userpage (and to visit the Teahouse), you should try to spend more time editing articles than in Wikipedia's behind-the-scenes areas. You're doing just fine so far, but it can be easy to get carried away. —GrammarFascist _contribs ^talk 04:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Mossboss254

Star (dog) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_(dog) says its an orphan we thought we corrected it last year?

Last year Star the Dog was an orphan page. A volunteer corrected that by linking it but now it says its an orphan again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_(dog)

Thanks for any help 108.167.4.178 (talk) 23:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi IP User, I have fixed the problem by linking the Star article to other Wikipedia articles so it is no longer orphaned now. NZ Footballs Conscience^(talk) 01:09, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

And I have linked it from Star (disambiguation). All articles with disambiguated titles should be linked from the base form of the name. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:14, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Uploading images to already existing articles

Hello! I'm quite new here, just made my first 2 edits ever on Wikipedia, so I was wondering is there a link for us new contributers to upload an image to already existing articles upon the actual editing process.I was trying to upload an image to Bradley James article, yet unsuccessfully.So, what should I do to actually upload an image to already existing article? Please give me some advice on how to do so, or even better, provide me with a link so that I would be able to upload files myself. Thank you so much in advance for your help! P.S. I'm using a mobile site, accessed from a 3G Android 6.0 smartphone. Hope that helps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikster X (talk • contribs) 13:39, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Wikster X‎ and welcome to wikipedia. Before I answer your question, let me offer one one bit of advice: always sign your comments on discussion pages (but not in articles!) by appending four tildes (~~~~) to the end of it. It helps us identify who said what.

Now on to your question: images aren't unique to an article, but are stored separately so they can be used in multiple articles. To upload a file, you can look on the left side of your screen when on a computer, or use the menu when on a mobile device to locate the link "Upload file". Once there, you can start the upload wizard, which should walk you through the process. Please remember that Wikipedia requires uploaded files to either have been released under a free license, explicit permission granted by the creator by filling out a form and emailing it directly to the Wikimedia Foundation, or for it to be a very small image used under the fair use doctrine in the United States. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 15:12, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

can anybody help me to make this article error free

can any buddy help me to make this article error free :( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahendra_Mewati i am very new to Wikipedia :) Sumitmpsd (talk) 07:02, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

(Nice deployment of intentional mis-spellings, and all lower caps btw! ;-) Scott P. (talk) 15:22, 26 September 2017 (UTC))

hello @Sumitmpsd, you mean grammar-wise or content wise? Grammar wise seems ok to me, it's very short anyway. Content wise is very little content, and the sources are not in a language I understand so I can't help with that. The problem with that banner is that there are not sufficient sources that prove that this guys is notable enough. Check it out here. It would help to have couple of sources in English. If you think that is not the case anymore since you published enough sources you can delete the banner, I guess. ----Beleriandcrises (talk) 09:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello Sumitmpsd and welcome to the Teahouse! The way the article Mahendra Mewati stands presented currently, there are several issues with it. You'd want to check the guidelines for notability and notability for actors. Going by the references, I am unsure with the content in references 1 and 2 for the language they are presented in. Reference 3 is notable, but it doesn't go into the details of the said actor. Reference 4 looks good for the claim of graduation. You might want to find more independent sources that focus on the individual. Further, the 'refname' had been invoked but never used and instead, the same reference had been cited twice. Though I've fixed it, you can read here on how to use the same reference multiple times in an article.

Remember that Wikipedia has guidelines on copyright that need attribution and request from the original author if the content (photograph in this case) is to be published. I can see that the image has its origin in a blog where the author hasn't shared the details of the image. Make sure you have the permission and attribution if the image is copyrighted, else it might be taken down.

Your edits are limited to more or less this article and Anubhuti kashyap, or articles relating to them. Before creating any more articles, please read Wikipedia:Your first article. Henceforth, submit your draft article for review rather than posting it in the mainspace, where there's a good chance for such articles to be nominated for deletion. Until then, you can keep editing (and learn from) other articles that more experienced editors have contributed to, simultaneously improving your article. Good luck! Mark the train^Discuss 10:08, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Mark the train and Beleriandcrises: reference 1 just mentions that he was in the play. The second one is a distinctly POV source praising him at every opportunity and says absolutely nothing about the material it is supposed to be citing. (this is based on Google Translate, so not perfect, but good enough for a general idea) -A lad insane (Channel 2) 15:58, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia is used by many Indians as a major reference for Indian culture. This guy Mewati is somewhat similar to a notable and successful Broadway theater actor who would never have similar press coverage to a Hollywood actor, yet who would probably have several articles written about them over the years. Mewati gets near 2,000 Google hits between English and Hindi articles on him combined. I'd say that probably wouldn't be bad for a notable Broadway actor. Yes, the article could probably still stand for some more improvement in the refs, but it seems to me that it is a sufficiently notable topic for retaining as an article. Scott P. (talk) 15:05, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Is this draft article ready for submission?

Hi, I submitted draft article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bernadette_Madden for approval and was turned down because "More sources that give in-depth WP:SIGCOV are needed". I've rewritten the article with sources and references added and am wondering if you think it passes muster now? Cobalt blue (talk) 12:32, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Cobalt blue. I took a look at that article. It's already been declined once, but if you feel you've made signficant improvements, you can use the blue "Resubmit" button in the pink notification box at the top of the page to try again. I have to say, however, that I'm seeing a big problem with the sourcing used. Two of the sources; Madden's website and Graphic Studio Dublin are primary sources, and seem to be used to support a large portion of the draft. Our policy is to avoid using primary sources whenever possible, and to especially avoid using them for considerations of notability, or whether or not we should keep the article. I would advise you to find reliable, secondary sources that can be used to source the content currently sourced to the primary sources. If you can't find them, then the unfortunate truth is that Madden is probably not notable enough for an article. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 12:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, Cobalt blue. I was going to say much the same as ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants but they beat me to it. Wikipedia isn't interested in what the artist has to say about herself. As an encyclopaedia, it's only interested in what others have written about the artist. Have a look at the links above, and possibly also WP:RS, and then see if you can list a number of sources which meet those criteria and who have written about Madden. As was previously said, if you can't do that, she's probably not notable enough for an article at the present time. Neiltonks (talk) 12:59, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Cobalt blue. I believe that Madden meets our notability guideline for artists. I did a Google Books search for "bernadette madden batik" and many possible references were displayed, such as a book called Irish Women Artists: From the Eighteenth Century to the Present Day. Build your article by summarizing the best of the independent sources, adding more such references to the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)