Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 105

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. 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 main page.

Many talk pages have a number of archives. Is it possible to view all the archive pages together in one go without having to go to each one in turn?

Example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Rite_of_Spring

This page currently has 33 archive pages, if my adding up is correct. It's really annoying to have to click each of those links to see what's there.

Thank you! Brightonjon (talk) 21:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Not exactly. You would have to manually make a page with all the text copied on, though it's counter-intuitive since you still are clicking each of the 33 links. Alternatively, substituting all the pages onto a single page might work. I don't know why Talk:The Rite of Spring is archived like it is. A simple continuous 1, 2, 3... ordering would have been simpler and there would be less pages. —Mikemoral♪♫ 21:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Mike. That substitution process looks scarily complex and I don't want to risk damaging the archive. Oh well.

Thanks for taking the time to reply, even if it's not the answer I was hoping for. Brightonjon (talk) 21:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

It's not terribly complex. For example, typing in {{Talk:The Rite of Spring/Archives/2003/February}} will yield the text on Talk:The Rite of Spring/Archives/2003/February. Then typing in {{subst:Talk:The Rite of Spring/Archives/2003/February}} will take all the text from the archive page and put it where you typed it in after you save the page. This is probably something best left for your sandbox. Though, it's probably easiest to just click each archive link. Hope that helps a little more. :) —Mikemoral♪♫ 21:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I have replaced the ridiculous archiving scheme at the talk page with a more sane one. It's now in two archives total and should continue to compile in that much less attenuated format.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:17, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

That's really generous of you Fughettaboutit - thank you :) Brightonjon (talk) 17:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I've taken a screenshot using Preview. How would I put that into a Wikipedia article? SmerkInYourEyes (talk) 21:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

p.s. I took the screen shot from a picture I found on the internet. Is there a way to put it on the article a different way because of this? SmerkInYourEyes (talk) 21:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, SmerkInYourEyes. Welcome to the Teahouse. Normally, to use a picture in Wikipedia, you need first to upload it and then you can link to it from a page. But Wikipedia is very very careful about copyright, and an image you found on the Internet is almost certainly copyright. Unless there is a specific statement somewhere that the image you are using has been released into the Public domain (or under a licence which is acceptable to Wikipedia), I'm afraid you may not upload it. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 13:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I have uploaded my images files to wiki commons and have image urls.

i have copy and pasted them into my page, but cannot seem to orient them left or center. they automatically orient on the right.

when i try to add "left" into the link, it does not work.

what can i do? Withstandley (talk) 18:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse!

Try [[File:Example.jpg|thumb|left|Caption goes here]] or [[File:Example.jpg|thumb|center|Caption goes here]]

See if it helps! --Tito Dutta (contact) 18:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

In addition, we have a tutorial here Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial#Thumbnails. Have a look! --Tito Dutta (contact) 18:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Withstandley! Can you link the image you are trying to use and the page you are trying to use it on? Perhaps one of use can see what exactly you are not getting correct in the syntax. Image markup can be touchy sometimes. Technical 13 (talk) 18:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

How do centijimbos work?? and how can I know how many of them do I have and how to add a userbox with the exact amount of them.?? Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Miss Bono, you may want to refer to the Centijimbos box in my userbox column on my user page. You can just click the number displayed in the text, and you will know the number of watchers, then you can copy the code for that box, insert the number of watchers and place on your userpage. Alternatively, you can refer to this page. Cheers. Arctic Kangaroo (✉ • ✎) 14:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

You have 0.834 centijimbos. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gilderien (talk • contribs) 19:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

If I want to create or help to create like a Teahouse but in the Spanish Wikipedia. it sure will help.??? thoughts?? Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I think that is a great idea Miss Bono. What I would suggest doing is bringing it up at whatever help desk, village pump, or other technical forum exists there and see if there are any other interested people. You are going to need at least a few hosts to start with and you are going to need an admin to be able to help set up pages in restricted areas and protect pages and whatnot. Good luck in this endeavor! Technical 13 (talk) 14:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Which help desk would you recomend?? Miss Bono (zootalk) 14:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

The es:Wikipedia:Café section related to new contributors and/or technical stuffs is where I would go first... Technical 13 (talk) 14:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

If a particular image is not liked by someone(maybe because it is ugly or graphic) can he/she remove the image?Would that be considered as vandalism or will just be undone?Secondly,I recently found an article which contains a few statements which contains irrelevant source, can I remove that?Michaeljackson56 (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Assuming that you have a good reason, it is of course acceptable to remove an image from an article. The standard approach in such cases, as with any edit, is known as Bold, Revert, Discuss - make an edit boldly, if another editor disagrees and reverts your changes, discuss it with them. The same applies to poorly sourced statements - you can remove them, but if they are replaced you need to discuss the issue with the other editor (and come to an agreement!) before making the change again. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:55, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Just in case , what if both the sides fail to come to an agreement?

Then we have dispute resolution processes that can be brought into play - getting a third opinion is usually the first stop for content disputes. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:06, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Michaeljackson56! While what Yunshui says about Bold, Revert, Discuss is true, I can fairly certainly assure you that "I don't like it" isn't going to get you very far and someone will revert you. Technical 13 (talk) 12:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

However, please be aware of the section of the verifiability policy known by the shortcut WP:BURDEN. If, as you say, the material is not supported by the citations that are placed (they "fail verification"), and you challenge not just the sources used but the material that the sources supported itself, then upon removal of the statements, the burden is on the person wishing to restore the material to add an inline citation directly supporting them--they cannot be restored within the bounds of policy without such directly supporting sources. The rub is that you should, upon your removal, very specifically frame the issue. I usually do so by actually providing a link in the edit summary to WP:BURDEN, with a statement of the policy, e.g.

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:53, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Of further note, however, is that Wikipedia articles need to be well written, and that includes the fact that graphics are relevent, informative, useful, and not visually distracting. It is quite possible that an image should be removed from an article, and in some cases no image is actually better than the image currently in the article. It would be a valid argument for removal that an image isn't relevant, or it is of such poor quality as to degrade the overall quality of the article, and removing it actually improves the article. That's a perfectly valid argument one can make, and it is not an inferior argument to any counterargument such that someone could force any image into an article merely because there isn't already another image to use. You also cannot force someone to remove an image, instead follow the advice of WP:BRD: boldly remove it, with an explanation in the edit summary, and also on the image talk page explaining what you are doing and why you are doing it. If someone does revert your removal, invite them to explain their rationale, and have a discussion. If the discussion reaches an impasse, invite extra people to examine the situation and comment, and then enact what the general consensus is. Verifiability (for text AND pictures) is a necessary but not sufficient condition for inclusion of something. That is, something may be removed from an article for valid reasons other than verfiability concerns, and merely being verifiable is not itself enough that a bit of information or a picture must be included. I've written a little essay on this very topic here. --Jayron32 23:40, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi

I recently had occasion to look at the posting for the AUV Sentry operated by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentry_(AUV) In looking at this for the first time, I find that it is fairly out of date and very incomplete and I would like to work to help correct that. However, my concern stems from my full time job as the AUV operations manager for the National Deep Submergence Facility at Woods Hole (in other words, I manage the Sentry operations and engineering groups), a potential conflict of interest. As an academic, I am used to writing from a factual, cited, and neutral point of view, but I would also normally feel the need to disclose any such relationship to my writing, something that I am not clear on how to do within Wikipedia.

So the crux of my question is, 1. is it appropriate to contribute to the page provided I do my best to remain neutral 2. is there further action required to disclose/manage this potential conflict of interest?

128.128.100.53 (talk) 11:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I you believe that you can write neutrally, then you are most welcomes to help. However, please try to not write or edit controversial statements. Also please try to use Reliable sources ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 11:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst editors with a conflict of interest are discouraged from editing in their conflicted field, they aren't outright forbidden - provided that you can adhere to Wikipedia's policies, there's no reason you shouldn't edit the article. From the sounds of things, you wouldn't have a problem doing so - the two key points to remember when editing with a conflict of interest (or without one, come to that) are:

• Everything must be neutral
• Everything must be sourced

I'd recommend that you restrict yourself to adding information that has been published independently of Woods Hole (in newspapers etc.); if there's something you feel that needs to be added for which there's no secondary source, suggest it on the article's talkpage and get a second opinion before making the change. It would also be advisable for you to create an account and declare your affiliation with the subject on your userpage.

Finally, you might also want to read the conflict of interest guidelines and the best practice guidelines before making any major edits; these pages will give you an idea of the pitfalls you might face and how you can avoid them. Happy editing! Yunshui 雲‍水 12:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

With respect to non-whoi sources, how would you classify publications in widely accepted academic journals and conferences but with WHOI authors?

Clkaiser (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I started copyediting an article, but stopped for a moment and thought to ask the question first (actually I am trying to find an answer for a long time now). Follow this link to see unusual line breaks. I have seen it in other articles too. In plain text email according to [RFC 3676 they break lines before 78 characters. But, what causes this problem in Wikipedia? The only thing I can guess is they are "copying as plain text" somewhere. Any opinion/idea? --Tito Dutta (contact) 08:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• This is a direct artifact of writing article copy in Microsoft Notepad (with the 'word wrap' option turned on) in order to avoid edit conflicts. It's a long standing Microsoft bug...see CR LF if really interested. Revent (talk) 08:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
• FWIW, this is why accidentally opening and then saving something like a .ps file (which is 'encoded' plaintext) in Notepad will corrupt the file. Revent (talk) 08:44, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Where I can see the articles I have created?? (not tool server) Miss Bono (zootalk) 20:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I dont think there is any other place to see that. For you the articles would be - Red_Light_(U2_song), Heartland_(U2_Song) and Cedars_of_Lebanon_(U2_song). TheOriginalSoni (talk) 20:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• Special:Contributions/Miss Bono :) Filter by (article) namespace. -- Revent (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• There is a place to see that TheOriginalSoni, and Special:Contributions/Miss Bono is not the most ideal place to do that Revent. Here is the complete list of articles created by Miss Bono that I got by going to Special:NewPages, typing "Miss Bono" in the username box, made sure that "article" was selected for namespace and told it to get results. Happy editing everyone! Technical 13 (talk) 21:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• /me high-fives Technical 13—great answer! Theopolisme (talk) 21:22, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Technical 13/+3 Great work. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 21:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Not to be a crank, but that only does show pages created within the last month. For example, I have created more pages than just the one that shows up using that method. Don't get me wrong, it will work for many newer editors, but for us old farts, it doesn't :) Go Phightins! 21:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• I hadn't noticed that phig... I'll research it some more in 30 minutes, need to run to the store for supper. Technical 13 (talk) 22:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I'll post the exact URL for you old salts tomorrow. This can be done with an api call to return and xml page I'm pretty sure. I'll see if I can't write up a user script to give you a pretty wikitable as well. I say tomoRrow beecause I'm calling it a night. Technical 13 (talk) 02:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, cuz I also created Morleigh Steinberg's article. Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

And what about A Man and a Woman (U2 song)?? Miss Bono (zootalk) 12:41, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Miss Bono. I think all this is a little more complicated than it needs to be. Go to your contributions tab, and look at the bottom. There is a link there for articles created. Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

There is indeed a link there, but the original question did say "not tool server". - David Biddulph (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• According to the history of Morleigh Steinberg, User:Ali Hewson created that article. However, the "article" created by that user was a userbox and if it was an article I created, I would see if I could get a WP:revdel or an WP:oversight to get rid of/hide those revisions. Still working on your api call url... Technical 13 (talk) 16:44, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

I was User:Ali hewson, I had to chage the user name, and don't remember having create such thing. Maybe it was in my begining on Wikipedia. I am sorry :( Miss Bono (zootalk) 16:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm... I'm not sure how on Wikipedia, but I would echo and administrator like User:Writ Keeper or a bureaucrat like User:MBisanz and see if they can do a user merge and delete... Anyways, this API call is the closest I could get with the API, but it only returns the last 500 articles and you would have to search for new="" to find the articles you created. I'll work on a userscript that can do that for you. Technical 13 (talk) 17:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

No, user accounts cannot be either merged or deleted. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Can the page be deleted and restored without those two edits at the beginning that aren't related to the topic of the page so that the page will properly show Miss Bono as the page creator? Technical 13 (talk) 17:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Well, that should do it. Not sure it was within policy, but whatever. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:39, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• FWIW, searching edit summaries for the text "Created page" gives the exact list, but....on toolserver. :/ Revent (talk) 17:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Looks good to me Writ Keeper. Technical 13 (talk) 18:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Just commenting that bureaucrats (and stewards) can't do user merge and deletes, so there's really nothing I can do to fix this person's problem. MBisanz ^talk 12:15, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

How do I find a copy of

to verify the meaning of a French language article, that the only redacted English language translation, found online, seems to have important text excluded that can be seen in Google snippet view; and, to cite the issue, column numbers, title and author of the article in the more reliable print source.

I believe the print publication would have more text than the redacted English language translation contains but claims to be an "in extenso" reproduction. Also, the redacted English language translation cites three pages, pp. 820 to 822, but using snippet view with different queries would give a different combined three pages, pp.819 to 821.

The redacted English language translation is from a site that may have a conflict of interest in what I think is possibly a 120+ year hoax, that I included as part of Joseph René Vilatte, that was repudiated by the print publication's article, over 50 years ago but still survives.

How do I then make my citation of the more reliable source verifiable for others?BoBoMisiu (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Sources which are visible online are nice, as are sources in English, but neither is a requirement for Wikipedia policy. Simply put, being publicly available, such as a published book which can be found in a range of public and university libraries, is usually sufficient. If the source exists in English as well as a foreign language, it's nice to use the English source preferentially, and if the source exists online, it's nice to link to that source, but neither is a requirement, and sources which aren't in English, and/or aren't availible online are not considered less reliable, or less verifiable, than sources which are. See Wikipedia:Verifiability, which states, in part, "Other people should in principle be able to check that material in a Wikipedia article has been published by a reliable source. This implies nothing about ease of access to sources: some online sources may require payment, while some print sources may only be available in university libraries." (bold mine) and "Citations to non-English sources are allowed. However, because this is the English-language Wikipedia, English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones, where English sources of equal quality and relevance are available." If the French version and English version are not equivalent, that is if there is more information in the French version, cite that one. If the two are substantially identical, cite the English one. And also, if the source is not available online, that matters not one bit. Just give the full bibliographic data about the source so others can obtain it from a library. --Jayron32 19:45, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The French is more reliable but inaccessible to me, except in snippet view. I can't vouch for the meaning because I can't read it. Do I mark up in some way my opinion in the citation about the redacted translation? I don't know what is missing. I can read French. I know names are missing from the translation. 3 university libraries and a major US library in town don't carry that issue.BoBoMisiu (talk) 20:13, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

OH! I see, you have no access to the source yourself, so you can't even use it to verify something you want to write, is that correct? Wikipedia has a service for this exact problem. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. You might try to ask there if someone can get you text from that source that you need. --Jayron32 01:01, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Please see theeuropeanlibrary.org for the full bibliographic citation of the french version. :)

Here is the online archive at HathiTrust, which is better than Google Books. It's actually a 'curated' collection, and the 'metadata' has much more relation to reality (the titles and such in google book scans are usually 'computer generated' from ocr). Revent (talk) 21:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

This...1753367 is the 'correct' OCLC, btw....the one you're using is a 'broken' google version not linked correctly from the old title of the journal. Revent (talk) 21:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• To be really specific...

{{cite book |last=LastName |first=FirstName |others=Trans. by TranslatorName |title=Article Title in French |trans-title=Article title in English |publisher = and so on for english version. |postscript=. Originally printed in: {{cite journal|location=Paris|publisher=|journal=Intermédiaire des Chercheurs et Curieux |language=French |issn=0020-5613 |lccn=56038557 |oclc=1753367 |volume=21 | date=September 1971 }}}}

LastName, FirstName. Article Title in French [Article title in English]. Trans. by TranslatorName. and so on for english version. Originally printed in:Intermédiaire des Chercheurs et Curieux (in French). 21. Paris. September 1971. ISSN 0020-5613. LCCN 56038557. OCLC 1753367. {{cite journal}}: Missing or empty |title= (help) {{cite book}}: External link in |postscript= (help); templatestyles stripmarker in |postscript= at position 26 (help)CS1 maint: postscript (link)

Revent (talk) 23:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• As far as Google Books, as long as they are 'page views', they are okay......ideal would be to use a cite like above for the ref list, and then 'Notes' with google books links to individual pages. It's described somewhere in one of the guidelines, but the way google books works, different ip addresses can see different pages, so some in toto the cites can get verified. You can inline flag the dubious ones...editing the urls to refer the the pages you can't see is self-explanatory. :) Revent (talk) 00:47, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Can someone please tell me why this template has an error in it and how to fix it. It (the error) comes from 1913 Gettysburg reunion. It seems to be a very important template so I don't want to mess with it until I fully understand how the template works. Jodosma (talk) 18:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Heya Jodosma, thanks for stopping by. You need to specify the specific year each time you call the template so the specific, correct report can be referenced. Add the parameter like this : {{Cite Gettysburg Commission Reports|version = XXXX}} where XXXX is the year of the report as listed on this page. The documentation at Template:Cite Gettysburg Commission Reports explains this a bit, though I agree the wording could be a bit better, such as explaining that the version parameter is mandatory, and needs to have a value that matches the specific year of the report. There's also a couple of extra, optional parameters such as "accessdate" (the date you read the report when you cited it) and "dateform" which allows you to provide a consistent date format across any article where it is used. Does that help? --Jayron32 19:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Yep, improper use of a confusing template error... What I've just done is modify the template to have a proper default value. I would be happy to add some logic to help explain errors better to make sure the template is used right in the future upon request. Technical 13 (talk) 19:11, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I think that clears things up a bit; the error message has gone but now I've read that article again I do believe that the reference needs some improvement. I'm not an American so it may be a while before I can put the correct stuff in. At the moment I'm inclined to dispense with the {{cite Gettysburg Commission Reports}} citation and just cut and paste the url. Would that be a problem? Meanwhile anyone who knows about this subject please feel free to pre-empt me. Jodosma (talk) 20:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

While the 'direct' method is fine, the template method is 'better', because the appropriate 'metadata' can get added for things like citatation indexes (see wp:COinS). It's not a big deal, though....as long as you properly cite the source, someone else can 'fix' the formatting. :) You're not 'required' to use templates for citations (see wp:CITECONSENSUS). Revent (talk) 00:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I understand that there is a book on Constitutional studies that many use to better understand the Constitution that you guys sell. Is it possible to get the book or the name of the book and where to purchase it. I saw the list of books that were on the list that you provide. But which is the best all around book for unde4rstandin the Constitution so than I can get a copy or two. Thanks

Alan BraithwaiteAlan.Braithwaite (talk) 18:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• Hi. I think you might have a misunderstanding, as Wikipedia doesn't itself sell books. (you might, however, be thinking of a Wikipedia Book that some editor has compiled from Wikipedia). If you're looking for an actual book itself that was recommended, a better place to ask might be the reference desk. This is more a place for talking about editing Wikipedia. Hope that helps. Revent (talk) 01:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello again and again :P I need to redirect a page (List of U2 Songs) to U2 Discography. Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done Technical 13 (talk) 17:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks!! Miss Bono (zootalk) 17:50, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you both sure that it's logical for List of U2 Songs to redirect to U2 discography while List of U2 songs redirects to List of songs recorded by U2? I would have thought that this was likely to cause confusion. If you want to move the target of the redirect of List of U2 songs (which would be the correct capitalisation), then I would suggest that you discuss it on the relevant talk pages, but the current target seems the more logical one. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

You're right David, and because of this I've modified the redirect of List of U2 Songs → List of songs recorded by U2 and created List of U2 albums → U2 discography. I'm rushing along working on other projects and I didn't properly spend the time needed to rationalize all of the names... Technical 13 (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello again. In the future, you can do this yourself by clicking on a link to the page you want to redirect and clicking on the edit button, or typing it in the search box and clicking on the red link that comes up if it hasn't been created, and entering the following text: "#REDIRECT [[Name of article you want to redirect to]]". — Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:03, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I want to create a userbox that allows to the user change his/her favourite u2 album and it shows the change. Like the userbox that shows the favourite number of the user. Can anyone help me?? Miss Bono (zootalk) 15:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Sure, I might be able to help. Show me the Userbox that you are talking about please.--Amadscientist (talk) 15:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome back to the Teahouse Miss Bono! I always look forward to the next question from you! One of the best places to ask for such a thing as help with a userbox is with the fine people over at WikiProject Userboxes (which I happen to be a member of). Hit me up on my talk page linking the favorite number userbox, the file (picture) you want to use or text for the little square, the text/information you want in the long box, and any specific colors or whatnot you are looking for and I'll put something together for you. :) Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 16:01, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I am trying to create my 1st wikipedia page about a Mix engineer named Ken Lewis. He mixes all of the mainstream artists in the industry. The only problem is that this is my first time and I really don't know what I am doing. I had his discography on there but then it got removed and now I am getting several errors. I read the guidelines but it still doesn't tell me how to resolve this problem. Someone please help me.

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the Guide to deletion.

This article may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. Please help by editing the article to make improvements to the overall structure. (May 2013)

This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (May 2013)

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2013)

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (May 2013)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Lewis_(mix_engineer)

2thumbsupllc (talk) 14:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, 2thumbsup and welcome to The Teahouse. You need some independent reliable sources such as magazines and newspapers that discuss Lewis in detail. You also need to stay away from such language as "industry legends", "premier songs", "genius" and "tons of outboard gear". These words sound like they are promoting the man and don't reflect a neutral point of view. There is also inconsistency in capitalization, and you go back and forth from "Ken Lewis" to Ken" when, really, it should just be "Lewis" after the first reference. I don't see the article as beyond salvaging.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I am attempting to change/bring uptdates to the wiki page. The current title is Harry Fox Agency, but we want it to read "The Harry Fox Agency, Inc." Can someone help me with this? I looked it up and it said something about using the "move" tab, but I do not have a move tab on my profile at the top. Please help. NmotleyHFA (talk) 13:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

•  Done TheOriginalSoni (talk) 13:47, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I do not see a response from TheOriginialSoni. Can someone help me address my issue? NmotleyHFA (talk) 13:51, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

TheOriginalSoni has moved the article. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 13:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse NmotleyHFA! I'm afraid that would violate the article naming policy ("The" specifically), so I'm moving the article back. Also, you may want to read up on our conflict of interest guidelines before adding any more content to your employers article. Happy editing! Technical 13 (talk) 13:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey T13. I see this as the only relevant line at WP:THE - Sometimes, the article "The" is also used at the beginning of the names of companies. Could you please clarify if there is any other policy I'm missing? TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:07, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

The company seems to mostly refer to itself as "HFA". You can see in the post directly below this response, NmotleyHFA himself refers to the company like this, not to mention his username (which may be against the username policy (company name and implied shared use specifically)) itself uses "HFA". There is no evidence at this point that the word "The" is actually part of the companies name and there are examples on their own website where they refer to themselves as "... the Harry Fox Agency ..." with the lowercase "the" implying that it is in fact not part of the name of the company. As I said, if there can be proof submitted that verifies that "The" is actually in the name, then your note above would be one of the "sometimes". Hope this answers your question. :) Technical 13 (talk) 14:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I dont consider most of what you said to be evidence, but I do agree that the company must have some sources to verify it uses "The" in its name frequently. Also, his username seems okay to me. Thanks for clarifying :) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Technical 13, I was directed by the marketing director to change the article to fit with the brand and reputation of HFA. This should not be an issue as it is positive and accurate reflection of the company. Please move back. NmotleyHFA (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Can it be moved to read "Harry Fox Agency, Inc."? As that is the companies actual name. NmotleyHFA (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Can someone help me move it back? NmotleyHFA (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It could only be moved back according to the guidelines if you can offer some independent reliable source that declares what the companies registered name is, and then it can be moved (renamed) to that. Technical 13 (talk) 14:08, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Nmotley. You seem to be a bit confused over Wikipedia's purpose - as an encyclopedia, we are not particularly concerned with ensuring that our articles fit the brand and reputation of the companies they cover. As a matter of fact, we actively avoid editing in ways that could be seen to promote a company or its interests; Wikipedia tries to present independently published information about topics in the most neutral manner possible. I'm afraid, therefore, that you and your company don't get to dictate the title and/or content of the article; the text is decided upon by Wikipedia's style and content guidelines. You might also want to have a read of the FAQs for companies and the conflict of interest guideline before continuing to edit. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

If I create an article about someone's opinion of a particular product, do I need secondary sources too? and what would those secondary sources be? Thanks Booklaunch (talk) 12:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

You will have to make sure that the opinion is notable enough for its own article. You will probably need secondary sources which discuss the opinion in detail. If you don't find them, then add the opinion to the article of that particular product. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 12:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Booklaunch, can you give us an example of what you're looking to do? If, for example, you there's an article for "Book X" and you want to note in the article that John J. Smith opined that it's the best American novel of the 1990s, then it would be appropriate to cite Smith's opinion in the "Book X" article provided Smith's opinion is significant in the field of literature. Ideally, like you note, it'd be from a secondary source, so instead of quoting Smith directly, it'd be ideal to cite from a larger article which itself notes Smith's opinion. Does that make some sense? Is that more or less your question? MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Mathew. That makes sense, thanks. I just need to cite according to article so and so from newspaper X, John Smith says that the book is a load of crap/ very good. So the last bit is a statement of fact for that particular source right? Booklaunch (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but you also need to make sure that you are not giving it undue weight. If there are many bad reviews, it is fair to discuss this, and perhaps quote some; but if Smith is a lone voice among many favourable reviews, Smith probably merits at most a mention, and not even that if neither Smith nor where he published is notable. See WP:WEIGHT for a discussion of this. --ColinFine (talk) 16:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

If I create an article, have I got special previleges over its editting. I mean after its creation? Thanks Booklaunch (talk) 12:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey Booklaunch. None whatsoever. Please see Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello. While I'm an established user of Persian Wikipedia, I'm not familiar with the English Wikipedia procedures. I didn't know where to make my request, so I did here! Currently, Pausanias is a redirect to Pausanias (geographer) but there is no obvious reason why to prefer the geographer to others. Please ask an admin to delete Pausanias and then move Pausanias (disambiguation) to Pausanias just like the French Wikipedia. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi 4nn1l2, welcome to en-wiki. I agree with your reasoning; I'll sort out the page move now. For future reference, in cases like this where you can't move the page yourself, you can file a request at the requested moves board, or tag the page to be deleted with {{db-move}}. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:25, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, can we upload youtube videos? Would be interesting to show that in music articles for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sevendigits (talk • contribs) 09:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Teahouse! No, you can not! Most of the videos are under "All rights reserved" and a good number of videos contain copyright violated materials. --Tito Dutta (contact) 09:53, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

However you can upload the samples of the songs. Have a look at WP:SAMPLE. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 10:16, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

well, thats too bad. thanks vibhijainSevendigits (talk) 10:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the copyright of pictures of paintings in wiki i would like to know about its legitimacy.Photographs of paintings on internet are either owned by artists or usually copyrighted.As this pictures are not found in public domain, then how did those pictures of paintings manage to find its way to wikipedia. And is it right to post pictures of famous paintings I come across on internet on wikipedia?And if I am not allowed then please tell me what kind of pic are allowed to be posted and what kind are not.Michaeljackson56 (talk) 05:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Michael. There's a lot to cover in terms of Wikipedia's image use policy, so I'll be as brief as I can. Most well-known paintings by famous artists of the past are now in the public domain, meaning that they can be freely reused - an example would be Vermeer's The Procuress. Artworks by living or recently deceased artists are usually reproduced under fair use, which allows copyrighted works to be reused in certain specific circumstances. An example of the latter would be Hirst's For The Love Of God.

As far as reusing images is concerned, public domain pictures are free to reuse. Fair use is much more restrictive, so you are unlikely to be able to reuse pictures which fall into this category. A simple rule of thumb is that if you find a picture hosted at Wikimedia Commons, you can reuse it as you wish, whereas if the picture is hosted on Wikipedia itself, there are probably restrictions on its use. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• Copyright on images of 'historic artistic works' is complicated....basically, you can't hold a copyright in the 'image of the work itself', but you may have copyright in the 'artistic composition' of the actual photo.

Essentially, if I go take a picture of the Mona Lisa, I can't copyright it. If I take a photo of the Mona Lisa hanging on the wall, with foreground, etc., I can hold copyright over that image, but I can't prevent someone from 'extracting' the public domain portion (the Mona Lisa itself) from my photo.

This isn't WP policy or anything, just how the laws work, at least to my understanding. IANACL, tho. Revent (talk) 23:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm only referring to 'historic' works, i.e. that are in the public domain themselves due to age. Revent (talk) 23:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• file:Mona_Lisa,_by_Leonardo_da_Vinci,_from_C2RMF_retouched.jpg This is a public domain photo. (THE wikipedia photo, in fact.) :)
• file:La_Joconde_(Le_Louvre)_(8226631218).jpg This is not (notice the Commons license). Revent (talk) 00:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Also see the official position. I'll stop talking to myself now. :) Revent (talk) 00:10, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I finished making changes to an article that had been rejected previousy. I edited it a number of times and finally hit "resubmit." Then a new section empty window appeared. I went to the history which has all my edits. However, I can't tell if it was submitted for review or not. Is there a way to determine that. The history page did not reflect it. How can I make sure my article we submitted correctly? Also, if it was, what happens next?

Thanks. Am I doing the signature right? 09Athena (talk) 03:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. In the box at the top of your AFC draft it says "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." That's the place to click to resubmit your draft.

Yes, your signature is fine. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

David, thank you for responding so quickly and confirming the sig works.

I wasn't having trouble finding the link to resubmit. My concern was that after clicking it, all I saw was the "new section" empty window even though I didn't need to start a new section. I assumed that after resubmitting Wiki would provide text like "thank you for your submission a reviewer will read it...." Please advise. Thank you!70.112.7.216 (talk) 12:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

When you hit the click here to resubmit, the new section window isn't empty. It includes, as well as some instructions, the code {{subst:submit}}. When you accept the Save, you'll see a new box on the page, headed "Review waiting." - David Biddulph (talk) 12:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello! I was hoping to be involved in translation and other things on wikipedia and was wondering where best to go next. 50.100.62.76 (talk) 02:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. A good starting point would be Wikipedia:Translation; there are numerous links, suggestions and guidelines there to help you. Thanks for volunteering! Yunshui 雲‍水 07:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

First of all, you are encouraged to create an account. If you want to translate articles, then you should go to the respective edition of Wikipedia. For example, if you want to translate articles into Spanish, you should go to Spanish Wikipedia. In case you want to translate interface messages (the messages which you come across while editing Wikipedia), you can go to this page to find translation requests. For example, if you want to translate the messages into Hindi, then write the language code of Hindi (hi) and then click on "Show statistics" button. The n you may click on any message group. After that, you will reach such a page. You can click on "Untranslated", and then click on the Edit button next to the messages. You can write the translation and then save it. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 07:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I want to update a music listing page that has been on wiki for some time and want to put up a music sample and make a 'background box ' around the photo, how do I do this Jessicatheone (talk) 01:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the TeaHouse Jessicatheone. The guidelines for adding music samples are at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music samples. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Is there any way to make all columns of all cells of a table easily? For example— 13.5%? --Tito Dutta (contact) 00:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome back to the Teahouse Tito! Of course there is a way to do just that thing! If you set the width for all of the columns in the first row to 13.5%, all of the rest of the rows will follow suit as in this example:

Hope that helps! Technical 13 (talk) 00:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It DEFINITELY helps! --Tito Dutta (contact) 01:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

• (cringes) Technically correct. Please don't do it that way.

Why? Defining tables with 'pixel widths' like that breaks if the display is narrower than the size you picked... (I'm 'crunching' this to not spam the Teahouse....don't use scrollboxes in articles).

• The first is the 'pixel' way, the second or third is better. Look at the effect when you change the width of your window...the first one is broken. Revent (talk) 08:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
• Yes, just to make it more clear, the point of my example was that you can define the width of each column in the first row and it will stay static throughout the table. How you define the width of the table (if at all) is entirely up to you and wasn't intended as a critical part of the demonstration. Technical 13 (talk) 11:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry if I came across as 'critical'..that wasn't my intention. It's just a 'style' thing, but the 'pixel' way is unreadable for some people. Revent (talk) 17:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

FWIW, 'accessibility' is a pet peeve of mine.....for instance, the extremely common usage of {{reflist|2}} is also broken for narrow displays.....something like {{reflist|30em}} is much better. (instead of a 'fixed number' of columns, it lets the web browser dynamically format them). I tend to use 'strange' display settings so that things like that jump out at me. Revent (talk) 17:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• Specifically, I use a 'forced' font size of 18 points, and then zoom out to make the page read normally. It specifically exaggerates certain types of layout 'errors', like text flowing up the right side of a fixed-size image. Revent (talk) 19:09, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

• (Talking to myself again, lol) The 'better' way to flow text up the right side of an image is with a {{nowrap}} around the first four or five words, so that if it's going to render unreadably narrow the browser will 'bump' the column below the image. Revent (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I want to search for living people with particular initials, for example for living people with the initials DP. However, I don't think asterisks are recognized as wildcards when they follow intitle. For example, I don't get any results when I search for intitle: (D* P*) incategory:"living people", even though there is a Wikipedia article on Douglas Preston, a living novelist who's categorized as a living person. Similarly, when I search intitle: (Taj Mahal), I get the article on the Taj Mahal, but I don't get any results when I search for intitle: (T* Mahal). Can someone help me figure out how I can run my search? I'm aware of the two tools on the tool server that allow one use regular expressions. However, I don't think the two tools have the ability to restrict the search to article titles. Thanks for your help, Clark Clark x zhang (talk) 23:19, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the TeaHouse Clark x zhang. I don't believe that there are any tools that answer exactly that question. There are a range of tools and opportunities to request tools be built as part of WP:Toolserver. Could you expand on what it is you're trying to achieve with this search, as there maybe another way to find the information you seek? Stuartyeates (talk) 01:41, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stuartyeates, I'm actually a medical student interested in implementing a variation of the Dominic Mnemonic System <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mnemonic_dominic_system>. To do this quickly, I have to be able to find the names of people with certain initials. Do you have any suggestions for how I can achieve this? Thanks for your help, Clark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clark x zhang (talk • contribs) 03:30, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Much as I hate to point you somewhere other than Wikipedia, lol. :) You should be able to do it by searching the persondata fields in biographies for 'alternative names', but many (most) are missing the info.....but.. you can search the 'merged' authority control database at viaf.org (search for 'personal names', and put in the initials). Just at random, I put in "D. C.", and the first of 10,000+ entries that came up was Voltaire. Apparently he used the pseudonym "Dom Calmet" at some point.

VIAF only covers people who have works held by libraries, though....for a better 'random' list of names, go to familysearch.org, which is the web interface to the LDS church genealogical database... literally millions for "D. C.".. first is D C Abbot, from the 1940 census in Springfield, Oregon....his wife was Frankie. :)

Kinda random advice for here, but hope it helps. :) Revent (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2013 (UTC)