Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 764

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.

How long does it take for an article to possibly get created from the Requested Articles page? I submitted a few entries because I cannot create the articles myself due to a COI. Please advise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Premierleaguemusic (talk • contribs) 19:17, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Probably not what you want to hear, Premierleaguemusic, but it takes how long it takes. Everyone here is a volunteer, and people will write about what interests them. When someone notices it that is interested, they may create an article. It is also possible that the articles you are requesting are not notable topics (yet) and an article cannot be created on them. John from Idegon (talk) 19:22, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

If you add a subject to the "Requested Articles" list, volunteer editors will look at it from time to time. The first thing most of them will do is check whether it seems to be notable (click that blue link to find the non-standard meaning the word has here). If the subject appears not to be notable, it will stay on the list for ever. Maproom (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hey everyone,

I just joined and I want to focus mostly on fighting vandalism for now. I noticed a lot of editors have counters on their user page that display their XP and I was wondering how I can put something like that on my page? Admins have cool ones too (like for number of people blocked etc.), so is there anything like that that’s specific to vandalism reverts? Thanks - Josh — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyclopedion (talk • contribs) 02:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

There are scores of vandalism-related Userboxes at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Wikipedia/Vandalism but none of them count how many vandalism-related reverts you have conducted. Labor on, but you are going to have to keep your own score. You can put a number in your User box text if you so wish. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

There is someone erasing my edits on the Culture of Florida page. I do not appreciate it one bit as much of the information this individual is posting is misleading and not true. I am a native Floridan and have a wide understanding of the Culture of Florida. How can I retrieve my edits, hours of work and research after this person has deleted my work? And how can I stop this person from destroying my work?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnsummers22 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

• See my reversions here [1] and here [2]. You can not post content unless it's supported by WP:RELIABLE sources. A lot of this is flatly unacceptable and unencyclopedic. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Johnsummers22: The place to discuss disagreements would be on the talk page of the article, but (as pointed out on your own user talk page) the problem was that the material you added was entirely unsourced. You need to include references to published reliable sources. Your material is still there in the article history, if you want to try adding it again with sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

J - What you know does not count. For example, I "know" I am a famous author, but unless other people - not me - publish descriptions of me to that effect in valid media - I am not considered Wikipedia-notable. No content without references! David notMD (talk) 21:31, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

hi, I've created a new page here, but not sure how to publish it. Could anyone also help me with formatting of the infobox on that page by fixing it and sending me a link to infobox templates? thank you Ewa hermanowicz (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Ewa hermanowicz, and welcome to the Teahouse. I edited User:Ewa hermanowicz/Festival of the snake-catchers to add {{Infobox recurring event}}, which seemed a good match for the subject. I also added {{Userspace draft}} which will permit you to submit this for review through articles for Craetion when it is ready. But this is not nearly ready to be submitted and published a s amainspace article, and if submitted today would almost surely be declined. It needs several additional reliable sources that discuss the festival in some detail to clearly establish that this festival is notable. Additional facts would also be a good idea. For example what is known about the origins of the festival? Have any scholarly sources discussed it? And so on. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:09, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello DESiegel, thank you so much for editing the page and for additional tips to make more likely to be accepted by the reviewers. I will work on it further.Ewa hermanowicz (talk) 4:02 am, Today (UTC−4)

greetings, please how can I edit a page title without the move options and how do I know if my page has been set cause when I google I can't find anything — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jadesix (talk • contribs) 18:31, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jadesix. If you want to move a page to a new title, but you don't yet have permission to do it yourself, you can request the move at Wikipedia:Requested moves. However, the page you created, Draft:Azikel Petroleum leading modular Refinery investment in Nigeria, was removed because it appeared to be advertising or promotional. Wikipedia article should only be written about businesses that meet the guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), they should be written from a Neutral point of view, and editors are strongly discouraged from writing about organizations for which they have a Conflict of interest. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 22:15, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I am a new user. I would like to post a biography. References about the person are available and included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HnubQubCi (talk • contribs) 22:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, HnubQubCi, and welcome to the Teahouse. Here is some advice on creating articles in general, and biographies in particular. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Creating new articles from a blank start is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia. In future I urge you to use the Article Wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. There, an experienced editor will review your draft once you think it is ready. Only when a reviewer approves will the draft be moved to the main article space. This avoids the situation where a deletion is requested soon after the initial version of an article is posted.

Also, please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, if you have not already done so. The advice there can be very helpful, in my view. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Here are some steps which often give good results if followed:

• First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there.
• Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
• Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
• Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
• Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
• Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed.
• Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.

Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I would like to have a discussion with others regarding the last few edits on the article here, Ruby McCollum. Where would be the best place to do this. On the talk page or is there a suitable forum? Neils51 (talk) 22:39, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Neils51: Yes, the article talk page is the best place for this. RudolfRed (talk) 22:48, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Neils51, and welcome to theTteahouse. The normal place to discuss improvements to an article is on the article talk page, in this case Talk:Ruby McCollum. Occasionally there is discussion on the page of a relevant wiki-project, but that is unusual. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:49, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks RudolfRed, DES, for your very quick reponses! Neils51 (talk) 23:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I have work (artwork) on multiple covers of publications no longer existing. Is it cool to post images of those covers, since my face/art are on it?Nujiro (talk) 19:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello Nujiro Do you own the copyright or does the publisher? --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

I own the copyright/art featured.Did 6 covers, then they passed away. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nujiro (talk • contribs) 20:01, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

@Nujiro: If you own the copyright, and are willing to licence the images under a free licence (meaning it can be reused for any purpose), then follow the instructions at WP:DCM and upload the images to Wikipedia Commons RudolfRed (talk) 22:50, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks much, i'll try that!Nujiro (talk) 23:58, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Generally speaking, how long does it take to get an article reviewed for publication?

I submitted the article Clearcover about a week ago, haven't heard anything yet. Tlvernon (talk) 23:46, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Tlvernon, and welcome to the Teahouse. A few weeks is typical, but it might take up to two months because of the backlog we have. Draft:Clearcover has not been submitted for review yet, though. Please click on the big button that says "Submit your draft for review!" at the top of the article. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 23:51, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Tlvernon. I urge you not to submit your draft just yet, because a quick look makes me think it would be decliend at this time. The tone is rather promotional, and several of the sources seem to be based largely on press releases from the company, or interviews with company spokespeople. Others are routine coverage of events such as funding rounds. Few seem to be independent and reliable sources that discuss the company in any depth. See WP:CORPDEPTH for more details. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:14, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hey, I'm looking to create an article for an old TurboGrafx-16 game. Specifically, I want to have the title in italics. Is there an easy way I can accomplish this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheTechnician27 (talk • contribs) 03:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, TheTechnician27. The way to make the title appear in italics is to add the {{italic title}} template at the top of the page. I recommend double-checking the WP:MOS to see if the title should appear in italics. Not sure what the guidelines are for video game titles. -- kewlgrapes (talk, contribs) 04:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

If I have Gmail and I set up a vacation responder will Gmail send a vacation responder to the Wikipedia email notification service if they email me? Thegooduser Let's Chat 02:17, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Thegooduser. An interesting question, but I believe the answer is no. Special:EmailUser works by sending the email from wiki@wikimedia.org on behalf of the user. The the reply-to field in the email gets set to the email address of the user who sent the email. I'm not entirely sure gmail's vacation responder works, but I think gmail would be smart enough to send the vacation notice to the right address (the user's address rather than the wikipedia address). If you would like to test it out, I'd be happy to send you an email and let you know if I get the vacation response. -- kewlgrapes (talk, contribs) 04:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dashwood,

We appreciate your contribution in creating the bank muscat page on wiki and thank you for all the efforts.

We wanted to change brand logo placed on the page and would really appreciate if you could help us do that. We have changed our corporate identity and would want to ensure we have the right assets placed across digital channels we're present on or mentioned about.

Look forward to hearing from you soon.

Thanks & Regards,

bank muscat — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bankmuscat (talk • contribs) 06:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Bankmuscat: the instructions for uploading a copyrighted logo are at WP:Logo. Make sure you follow the directions for uploading a copyrighted logo, and do not accidentally choose the options for releasing your copyright. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Also see your Talk page; you must change your username as it is not allowed to have a shared account for a group. Accounts must be individual. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:41, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I spent the last 2 hours creating a page for Pfaffenthal-Kirchberg railway station, and accidentally clicked off the page whilst creating it, and now can't seem to find it. I put a couple of hours of work into this so far, so is there a way I could get it back? Would wiki have it stored, or is there a way I can find it in my cache? Thanks, Luxofluxo (talk) 07:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Luxofluxo and welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to get back to your work is to click the "back" button in your browser. Wikipedia does not have an autosave facility. I would recommend constructing new articles in draft space, and saving every few minutes, to avoid this problem in future. Dbfirs 07:26, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Pfaffenthal-Kirchberg railway station exists. That must be a version you created after posting the above. I see that you're frequently saving it, which is sensible. Maproom (talk) 09:18, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

... now published as an article. I hope you were able to recover your work. Dbfirs 07:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

namaste teahouse team,

1) i want to know can we have the same standard size of all images on any page of Wikipedia.

2) can we increase size of images to 300 px into Wikipedia page?

Regards, kevIN kovaDIA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevin Kovadia (talk • contribs) 06:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Kevin Kovadia, welcome to the Teahouse. You can change "Thumbnail size" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. One of the options is 300px. It only affects images declared as thumbnails with no specified size. See more at Help:Pictures#Thumbnails. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I would like to become a mass message sender. What should I do for it? I read WP:MMS, but kindly tell about the requirements for gaining it. I am participating in a quiz(WP:PINQ) conducted as a part of Portal:India, WikiProject India. I would like to use this right to inform project members about the current condition and situations of the quiz for the active participation of members in quiz. Kindly please help me.--PATH SLOPU ^(Talk) 09:19, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Path slopu. Did you see Wikipedia:Mass message senders#Requesting rights? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello. thanks for you. how many editors work on wikipedia ? and which articles registered by them ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamad137026 (talk • contribs) 10:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I have moved your question here to the foot of the page, where it belongs. You had placed it in the middlle of the page and (presumably mistakenly) deleted an existing section, which I have now replaced. You also forgot to sign your message.

There are currently 49,105,114 editors on the English Wikipedia, of which 117,838 are actively editing, see WP:Wikipedians. I don't understand your second question, unless you are asking how many articles, to which the answer is 6,991,153 in the English Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I created a new fantasy world that I plan to write a book about. Am I allowed to add it to the List of Fantasy Worlds article?

Kyron1st (talk) 13:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

If your fantasy world becomes notable in Wikipedia's terms by receiving significant detailed coverage in published independent reliable sources, then someone else can write a Wikipedia article about it, but you shouldn't as you have a conflict of interest. At that stage, the article can be linked from List of fantasy worlds. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

So I can add it to the list before an article is written about it or after? Kyron1st (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

After. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Ok, thank you. Kyron1st (talk) 14:04, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi how do I add pics to my page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsymons0131 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Dsymons0131! First of all, usually, for you to add an image it should be available on Wikimedia Commons. You can upload your own photos there, but not most images you can find on the internet, because of copyright reasons. This means that if you want to add an image of yourself to your presentation here (if I understand you correctly), unless it's a selfie, you should probably ask the photographer to upload it instead of doing it yourself. You don't own the copyright to images of you that someone else has taken.

Once they are available on Commons, you can find them and add them using the visual editor or add them with [[File:IMAGENAME.jpg|thumb|DESCRIPTION.]] if you use the wikitext editor. You can read more on Wikipedia:Images. Please don't hesitate to ask more questions if you need more help. /Julle (talk) 15:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Good Morning, Just to be clear, I think it is inaccurate to list Joice Heth's "occupation" as "slave". According to the Oxford Dictionaries a job is defined as: "a paid position of regular employment, a task or piece of work, especially one that is paid." I is common knowledge that enslaved persons in pre-Civil War were not paid for their work with their "masters". Of course some enslaved persons with special skills were leased out by their "masters" and at times paid a portion of the monetary gain from the leased work. But in this case it would be inaccurate to labed Joice Heth's occupation as a slave because the greater likihood is that she was not paid for her work as were the majority of enslaved people in America. Perhaps a better description of occupation would be: "unpaid enslaved woman".

Barbara Pitts Larkin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.45.92.112 (talk) 15:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Barbara. Concerns about specific articles should be raised on the talk page for that article. You can find a link to the talk page in the upper left of the article. For example, the talk page for the Joice Heth article is at Talk:Joice Heth, and I posted a response to your inquiry there. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:38, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I need help finding those. Can you link me to that list? Written by Educator57 (talk) 02:20, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Educator57: I moved your question to the bottom of the page, which is where new questions go. Check out WP:TYPO for the typo team's page on how to find and fix typos. WP:VANDAL has tips on finding and fixing vandalism. RudolfRed (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I have received a strange notification from someone in the French Wikipedia on a strange French "East Anglian Regional" talk page. At first when I received the email, I thought it was a scan as it was in French, because I have never edited on the French Wikipedia. The only time I have ever ventured on the French Wikipedia was when I accidentally pressed on the French page for Théo le Vigeuroux. Does anyone have any explanation for this strange message? comment added by East Anglian Regional (talk • contribs) 19:27, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, East Anglian Regional, and welcome to the Teahouse. Some Wikimedia projects automatically welcome any new user who logs in by visting the page while logged into the Wikimedia simgle-unified-login (SUL) system. That could be what this is, but unless you quote or link to the message it is hard to say. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:33, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Is the message just the standard welcome message that was sent out as a result of your brief visit to the French version of Wikipedia? Google will give you an approximate translation. You can safely ignore it if it just says bienvenue. Dbfirs 19:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you everyone. It looks like the welcoming message to the French Wikipedia but it's very extensive. The worrying thing was the extremely poor email I was sent by the French Wikipedia which looked concerning. This is the message:

Mieux comprendre Wikipédia

Principes fondateurs Wikipédia en bref : l'indispensable à savoir Interface : le mode d'emploi Devenir rédacteur

Débuter sur Wikipédia Sommaire de l'aide et jargon Comment citer des sources ? Forum d'aide aux nouveaux Vos pages

Votre page d'utilisateur (aide) Créer un brouillon (aide) Rejoindre la communauté

Accueil de la communauté Annonces et événements communautaires Rejoindre un projet éditorial Bienvenue sur Wikipédia, East Anglian Regional !

Bonjour, je suis Frakir, et je vous accueille en tant que wikipédien bénévole.

Wikipédia est une formidable aventure collective, toujours en construction. La version francophone comporte aujourd'hui 1 980 283 articles, rédigés et maintenus par des bénévoles comme vous et moi. Vous allez y effectuer vos premiers pas : n’hésitez pas à me contacter si vous avez besoin de conseils ou d'aide pour cela, ou à laisser un message sur le forum des nouveaux. Une réponse vous sera apportée avec plaisir !

Wikipédia repose sur des principes fondateurs respectés par tous :

Encyclopédisme et vérifiabilité (s'appuyer sur des sources reconnues) ; Neutralité de point de vue (pas de promotion) ; Licence libre et respect des droits d'auteurs (pas de copie ou plagiat) ; Savoir-vivre (politesse et consensus) ; N'hésitez pas à modifier (l'historique conserve tout). Vous êtes invité(s) à découvrir tout cela plus en détail en consultant les liens ci-contre →

Un livret d'aide à télécharger, reprenant l’essentiel à savoir, est également à votre disposition.

Je vous souhaite de prendre plaisir à lire ou à contribuer à Wikipédia.

À bientôt !

P.S. Vos nouveaux messages seront affichés en bas de cette page et signés par leur expéditeur. Pour lui répondre, cliquez sur sa signature (aide). Frakir (discuter) 2 mai 2018 à 21:21 (CEST)

Retour à la page d’utilisateur de « East Anglian Regional ».

East Anglian Regional (talk) 19:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@East Anglian Regional: Special:CentralAuth/East Anglian Regional shows your account was created at the French Wikipedia today when you visited it while logged in. You received a welcome message at fr:User talk:East Anglian Regional. The message triggered a notification mail which quoted the message as pure text. This looks bad. The message was designed for the page layout and links at fr:User talk:East Anglian Regional. You can avoid notification mails about talk page messages by removing the second checkmark at "Message sur ma page de discussion" at fr:Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Why are the people here mostly Indian?Stombari2 (talk) 17:37, 28 April 2018 (UTC)Stombari2

My guess is because of the hundreds of millions of people in India who speak and write English, and want to make contributions to the English language Wikipedia. What do you guess? David notMD (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

People contribute from all over the world. It's one of the greatest highlights of the project. ー「宜しく 」 クロノ  カム  19:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

They are? I thought they were mostly western Europe + North America people. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:41, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation compiles statistics about where wikipedia readers come from here. Only about 7.4% are from India. I'm not sure how that breaks down for editors, as opposed to readers, but I would expect that the breakdown is similar. The reason you see many new articles written on Indian subjects is simply that most of the early English Wikipedia editors were from the US and the UK, so most of the topics from those countries already have articles. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 21:57, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Depending on what time of the day you are most online at wikipedia, that may also affect which region seems most present Nosebagbear (talk) 15:46, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Yeah. When I was in China, a lot more of the spam accounts I blocked and promotional articles I deleted were for Indian businesses and would-be celebrities. Now that I'm back in the States, I don't see nearly as any Indian spammers. I assumed it was the same ratio of spammers to good users, but that the time I was active (in China) happened to be business hours for India (meaning more activity of any sort from India). It seemed natural to me that since India used to be a British colony, English would be a fairly common (second if not first) language there. (IIRC, many schools there teach only in English because the students might speak a dozen different local languages). Between that and India having pretty decent tech and telecommunications industries, it's to be expected that there would be a fair number of Indian users. The number of appeals from other language Wikipedias I've seen on ANI, as well as some off-site conversations with non-Anglosphere individuals, give me the impression that the English Wikipedia is regarded as being more prestigious or something. Overall, I don't see any reason to be surprised by any non-majority percentage of Indian users (heck, I'd just shrug at a plurality, although I doubt that's the case). Ian.thomson (talk) 22:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Stombari2, in my opinion that is a very racist and offensive question. You shouldn't ask questions like that. It's tasteless and rude to ask racist questions. Let's keep things here on Wikipedia neutral rather than trying to start racism wars. Ridebuilder575 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm with Ridebuilder575 on this. It is both extremely offensive to people of other nationalities to say that and a violation of keeping Wiki neutral.ConnallES (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I must disagree. It is a fact that all areas of the world are not represented here in equal proportion, or even in proportion to the number of English-speakers. This is a known source of systemic bias. Commenting on the actual proportions is not racist unless done with racist intent, or in a way that any reasonable person would take to imply such intent, as I see it. Also, it is Wikipedia's articles that must be neutral. Talk page discussion must be civil, instead. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:42, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree that it's not necessarily racist, though I'm guessing that maybe Stombari2's surprise is what raised that concern. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:05, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello!

I came across an article on Wikipedia about a place. The name of the place was misspelled. How correct it. I tried to edit the article but was rolled back.

Looking for your kind suggestion

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khunjerav (talk • contribs) 17:42, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Khunjerav! Welcome to Wikipeda. In this case, the article Khunjerab National Park has a number of sources that transcribe the name to Khunjerab in English, which makes it a bit more complicated. I recommend that you bring it up on the talk page to discuss the problem: Talk:Khunjerab National Park. Since the article has sources that uses the spelling Khunjerab, you will be more successful if you can point to better sources for the spelling you want to change to. /Julle (talk) 21:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I certainly hope this doesn't come off as pedantic; you might like to know that a name created in a foreign alphabet or other writing system, when presented in a new writing system, is transliterated rather than transcribed or translated. It's a fun word with one very specific use-case, to wit, this one. Nonsequitrist (talk) 22:06, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Nonsequitrist: Yes, transcribing was oversimplifying. I was trying to avoid unnecessarily complex terminology, but maybe a bit too much so. (: /Julle (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Where did my draft go? I haven't submitted it, but can you just tell me where it has been saved? Where can I find it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by UnbeatableFlame154 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

UnbeatableFlame154: Are you perhaps looking for Draft:Area, Perimeter, and Volume? /Julle (talk) 22:43, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

You can find your previous edits at Special:Contributions/UnbeatableFlame154. /Julle (talk) 22:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

I am confused about a Conflict of Interest issue. I work for a non-profit organization that is described by a Wikipedia entry that I did not start. I added current information, but I am a paid contract worker of the non-profit organization. Is that a conflict of interest? Also, I would like to start a new entry about services provided by the non-profit. Am I allowed to do that? Can volunteers do that?

Thanks!

Sandy Dimiterchik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandydimiterchik (talk • contribs) 15:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

• @Sandydimiterchik: - if you edited the article of your employer, then yes, that would be a conflict of interest. Please peruse WP:COI in full before making any further edits. In future, such edits should be made by leaving notes on the talk page, with relevant references from reliable sources. As for the second query, regarding a new article, I would state that such a venture would not be very advised, as it is once again a clear conflict of interest. If the services are significant enough, and not already mentioned in the original article (bear content forking in mind), then someone else will make it - I personally see nothing in the existing article which would warrant a new article. Oh, and please refrain from citing material to yourself, as this is not productive or constructive as edits go. Hope that this helps, Stormy clouds (talk) 15:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC).
• Schizophrenics Anonymous is the article in question, for those interested. Not exactly in great condition, and I had to place maintenance tags on it, mainly relating to citations. Stormy clouds (talk) 15:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

OK, so I understand that employees are not supposed to edit pages related to their employers. What about volunteers? Do I need to erase my editing and if so how do I do that?

Thanks!

Sandy Dimiterchik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandydimiterchik (talk • contribs) 15:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

• @Sandydimiterchik: - in terms of fixing your own edits, no, this will not be necessary, as I have already amended your edits to keep any appropriate parts. However, in terms of volunteers editing, the following is the answer - if you mean work with the company in any capacity, paid or unpaid, this is a clear-cut conflict of interest, and editing on such articles should be prohibited. If you are volunteering at SA, you should not edit the article, and attempting to circumnavigate what is a pretty explicit policy will not be appreciated. Quite simply, if you know a person, or work with a company, Wikipedia policy indicates that you should not make edits to those articles. Hope this helps clarify affairs for you, Stormy clouds (talk) 15:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC).

N.B. - in future, please sign your posts on talk pages or the Teahouse by leaving four tildes (~~~~) at the end of a post. Thanks, Stormy clouds (talk) 15:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC).

Stormy - I think you are overstating the case against COI or even PAID people from having a path to edits. I would like to see a response from other Teahouse hosts. David notMD (talk) 20:12, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

the conflict of interst guideline says:Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to change an affected article's content. Anyone editing for pay must disclose who is paying them, who the client is, and any other relevant affiliation; this is a requirement of the Wikimedia Foundation. Also, COI editors should not edit affected articles directly, but propose changes on article talk pages instead. and later goes on to sayEditors who have a general conflict of interest may make unambiguously uncontroversial edits (but see WP:FINANCIALCOI). They may: remove spam and unambiguous vandalism; remove unambiguous violations of the biography of living persons policy; fix spelling and grammatical errors; repair broken links; remove their own COI edits; and add independent reliable sources when another editor has requested them, although it is better to supply them on the talk page for others to add. (Reformatted from numbered list to prose for easier quoting.) Personally, I tend to be on the lenient side when a COI editor has fully disclosed the conflict, and seems to be editing in good faith. But in such cases an uninvolved editor should at least review the edits to help insure against unconscious bias and promotionalism. I have sometimes been willing to do such reviewing in the past. Note that WP:COI is a guideline, not a mere essay, but also not policy. WP:PAID on the other hand, is a policy, and is also part of the foundation's terms of use, and knowingly undisclosed paid editing is grounds for a block regardless of anything else. COI editing is not, strictly speaking, prohibited, but many take a very dim view of it, and any appearance of promotionalism in the course of it can lead to reversions and blocks. @David notMD, Stormy clouds, and Sandydimiterchik: DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@David notMD: - I absolutely believe that people with COI's can make positive contributions to articles, and have a place. It was not my intention to deter people from making such edits, as, to use the parlance of an RFA, a net positive to the project. In hindsight,Wikipedia policy indicates that you should not make edits to those articles was a tad hyperbolic, and for that I apologise. However, the specific circumstances in this case led me to adopt the approach of the policy itself, as kindly stated by DESiegel. The edits in question, which occurred prior to any disclosure on behalf of the OP, involved adding self-published links, pseudo-promotional language, and breaking existence references, and were broadly unencyclopedic in nature. When a COI editor is making edits which improve the article in question, I would advocate the application of WP:IAR, as they are enhancing the encyclopedia. In this case, the violations of both the COI and PAID policies were clear. The initial discussion about COI editing was followed by a question regarding another form of COI editing, which did not inspire confidence (understandably, in my view). In the absence of quality edits as testament, it is best to tread the party line, and promote the policies and guidelines as they already exist. Feel free to provide other advice if I took too harsh a line, as I am sometimes prone to doing. Thanks, Stormy clouds (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC).

Stormy clouds I was responding to a purely hypothetical question, and I am in no way criticizing you for being strict about editing that both appears to be a net loss, and a pretty clear violation of guidelines and/or policies. I do think some people are too knee-jerk in their responses to declared COI and PAID editors, and to newcomers who fail to understand our policies on COI, which are quite different from those of many other web sites. I have seen declared COI editors do some very good work here. But I have also deleted literally thousands of spam pages (about 2000, actually) and removed much promotion from articles that I did not delete. I believe in AGF strongly but it is not a suicide pact. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:23, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Back to the specific case, this is an editor who joined yesterday, has only been editing the site for which has COI and PAID, and asked about starting a new article about same organization. So I agree the hard pushback was warranted. The editor has added the PAID situation to User page, and Jytdog left a comprehensive explanation on Talk page. David notMD (talk) 01:28, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

The article in question also has many instances of close paraphrasing, but the frequency of actually ignoring the cited source and even contradicting it is striking. Is there a template for this latter problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ThisUserIsAnonymous (talk • contribs) 20:48, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

{{Original research}} or {{synthesis}} may be relevant, as well as {{contradictory}}. In such cases it is always best to also open a discussion on the article’s talk page to resolve the issue being tagged. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Acknowledged. Some of the "close paraphrasing" seems to actually be copyright infringement / plagiarism. Is there a template for that?ThisUserIsAnonymous (talk) 21:03, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Template:Cv-unsure can be used if you're not sure. Template:Copyvio if you're pretty certain it's a copyright infringement. /Julle (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@ThisUserIsAnonymous: Don't forget to use the 4 tildes (~) when on talk pages or the Teahouse. ―YoloMaxi ☎ ^(contribs) 20:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@ThisUserIsAnonymous: Another useful "inline" template (meaning placed in the body text of the article) is {{failed verification}}. You would place this next to the citation where the article text says one thing but the citation says another. It will insert the following text: ^{[failed verification]}

--Drm310 🍁 (talk) 02:24, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

How do I lodge a complaint about a page? HistoricBaptist (talk) 23:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, HistoricBaptist, and welcome to the Teahouse. It depends on the nature of your complaint, but in most cases you can start by posting to the talk page of the article or other page involved. Add {{help me}} to get attention from an experienced editor if the page is not much edited. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:34, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, HistoricBaptist. I assume that you are referring to Tower of Babel, where you are engaging in edit warring to insert content without consensus. Please try to achieve consensus at Talk: Tower of Babel, and do not try to add contested content without consensus. That isn't permitted here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:00, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

HistoricBaptist, am I correct the article in question is Tower of Babel? If so, it may help you to understand what an encyclopedia is. As a tertiary source, we discuss subjects based on what secondary sources say about them. You're changing the content there, without providing any secondary sources to back your changes. I'd suggest strongly you stop doing that, because that is edit warring and it will lead to your editing priveleges being suspended or revoked. Instead, go to the article talk page and discuss it, providing reliable secondary sources to verify your claim. John from Idegon (talk) 07:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Fouriels (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Fouriels: - if they are described as cults by reliable sources, then no it is not. However, be careful to avoid placing undue weight on such claims if they are in a serious minority amongst RS's on the topic - i.e. if 20,000 articles describe an organisation as a charity, and one describes them as a cult, it is probably best to not call them a cult. So, in short, if reliable sources describe them as such, then you are fine - just allow common sense to apply. Stormy clouds (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

@Stormy clouds: Thank you! Fouriels (talk) 21:20, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Fouriels, I would also suggest consulting WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. It might be more appropriate in some circumstances to write that "author X states that subject Y is a cult" than to write "subject Y is a cult". Cordless Larry (talk) 09:17, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: I'm talking more in the text itself - for example: 'In August 1989, Aum Shinrikyo was granted official religious corporation status by the Tokyo Metropolitan Government. This recognition caused the cult to experience dramatic growth'. It helps to have multiple descriptors other than just 'the group', but if it's preferred to not use the term 'cult' then I can adapt.

hello so I just have one question can you please provide me with a list of uncreated articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.151.104 (talk) 07:18, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Others may know more than I do, but the closest thing I know to that would be Requested Articles, which where articles have been suggested for creation. It is divided up by subject matter. I would note that if it is your intention to create articles, you cannot do so directly as an IP user. You can use Articles for Creation, or you can register a username and once you are autoconfirmed(the name is four days old and has at least 10 edits) you can then create articles yourself. However, please understand that successfully creating an article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia. I'm glad that you seem to want to be involved in this, but I would suggest starting smaller by editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia works. You may also want to use this tutorial in using Wikipedia, and read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia. I was wondering how I could insert a link to another article and/or Internet site? Would be much appreciated. Sorry for the trouble! --Espilio (talk) 22:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Espilio! If you use the visual editor, you click on the little chain in the interface, next to "Cite".

If you use the wikitext editor, it works like this. [[Sweden]] links to Sweden. [[Sweden|a northern country]] becomes a northern country that links to the article about Sweden. For an external link, you can use [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Wikipedia] which will then create Wikipedia.

Please don't hesitate to ask if you've got further questions. /Julle (talk) 22:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

You can find more about linking in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. /Julle (talk) 22:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh, alright. Thank you very much, Julle! from Espilio (talk) 23:02, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Espilio. You should be aware that exteral links, that is links to sites other than Wikipedia, should not go into the bodies of articles. External links can be used in citations to link to sources, they can be present in an "External links" section near the end of an article, and one or two may be placed in an infobox near the start of an article. But those are the only places that they should be used on article pages. See our guideline on external links for more details. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh, now I get it. Thank you for the info, DES! I really liked the beginner-friendly environment here at the teahouse. | From Espilio (talk) 11:32, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Is anyone aware that NYC has its own Quilt Chapter not incorporated into the Memorial Quilt WP has a page about. Many other cities around the world have had quilt chapters and in the last decade some have wholly transferred their care to museums.

Is there interest on the part of WP to have a larger sample of the panels still out in these separate chapters, I know we have a link to see more of the primary Quilt, but there is an entire backstory (mostly oral, but likely a paper trail exists... Brent Nicholson Earle knows much here.

Perhaps WP should offer to help create some cohesion where it is needed. In 2019 a number of Panels should be hand-carried from various cities for display in NY. Bounce this thought around and let's see... Mrphilip (talk) 12:00, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Mrphilip, and welcome to the Teahouse. I am afraid that you are misunderstanding the purpose of Wikipedia. It is not tocreate cohesion or to aid any worthy task. It is to create a free online encyclopedia. This means that it only covers things that have already been written about in published reliable sources. It is unusual that a local chapter or branch of a national organization is considered notable and has a separate article about it, although it can happen. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:19, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I am working on a draft (Draft:Medhananda) that had been rejected because of insufficient References last year. This year I had reactivated it and resubmitted it on March 7th in a form very much shortened and with new References which are in my view verifiable enough . I have heard nothing since. Is there somebody who could explain to me what more is needed for this article? Thanks in advance. GoldenerBall GoldenerBall (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

You didn't resubmit Draft:Medhananda. Use the blue "Resubmit" button. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much, David! I have done as you said with the Draft:Medhananda. I hope it is correctly resubmitted now. GoldenerBall GoldenerBall (talk) 11:14, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes, the draft is now in the queue for review. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Friendly advice, an unofficial comment -- and not reviewing your content, which may or may not hold up to standards -- is that for readability your article will improve if split into several smaller paragraphs rather than one long paragraph. Good luck GeeBee60 (talk) 13:30, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

I reviewed Draft:Mohsen Keramati and declined it, saying that it did not establish musical notability or general notability. I was asked by its author, User:Bkkh, to take another look, and I will try to address tone issues and notability issues. The previous reviewer had said that the article did not establish notability, and had a promotional tone. In my opinion, it still has a promotional tone. I see that what the author did after the first decline was to add many references. I personally think that the draft is now long on references and short on text that neutrally describes the subject as notable, but that is only my opinion. I also acknowledge that I probably allowed my feelings on single-purpose accounts to prejudice my assessment. The subject does pass notability in the Farsi Wikipedia, for whatever that matters.

What are the comments of other experienced editors?

Robert McClenon (talk) 18:25, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• I think it's just a case of reference bombing, and that you're right: I'm seeing a lot of refs purporting to link the subject with this or that more prominent musician, but nothing by way of significant coverage that's about the subject in reliable, third-party sources. Hamshahri is a notable newspaper and reliable source, but these biographies (of several musicians) posted on its website appear to be press release-fueled. The notability standards of the Farsi Wikipedia is, of course, of no issue here. Ravenswing 22:21, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

• Thank you for the explanation. (I am new to authoring Wikipedia articles. Thus, it takes time for me to be able to follow its standards).
• What I perceive from your comments is that I have given too many references.
  • The most significant case is articles from Hamshahri. To resolve this, I should remove (most of) those entries. Instead, I can refer to album covers that Keramati has been part of their production, and/ or articles from other reliable websites. Right?
  • Other references are album covers and articles from different known and reliable news websites (mainly khabaronline.ir ,Mehr_News_Agency , http://www.honaronline.ir/). These news articles inform about what albums have been released. I think using them as references supports showing music notability of the subject. Plus, they are not self-published. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkhh (talk • contribs) 13:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

If nobody responds to a merge request can I WP:BOLD merge and redirect the page after a certain amount of time. Alduin2000 (talk) 13:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Alduin2000, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:MERGE saysGeneral advice: It is unlikely that any editor will object to you boldly performing the merger if: you propose a merger and nobody objects within 30 days, [or] the merger proposal is older than 30 days and nobody has objected, and you personally believe that the merger is appropriate (converted from a bulleted list to prose for easier quoting) I urge you to follow the procedures described at WP:MERGE . Note that if a consensus supports a merge, there is no need to wait for 30 days, that is just if no one has responded. If you do a merge, I urge that you use {{Copied}} on the talk pages of both source and destination articles to help preserve attributions. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:56, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. Alduin2000 (talk) 14:25, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Lomrjyo 15:47, 3 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lomrjyo (talk • contribs)

Hi Lomrjyo, welcome to the Teahouse. It depends on the type of link. You can link a Wikipedia article by placing the name in double square brackets like [[example]] to produce example. See more at Help:Link and come back if you have a more specific question. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:10, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

It sounds like a joke but I was trying to find out if this was a real person in the Soviet era and if so what their full name is. Supposedly they helped carry out the Red Terror. But I haven’t found any reliable sources. Marxist student (talk) 15:50, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Marxist student. Here is a book that says he was in charge of purging the Red Army but was himself purged and executed in 1937. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:00, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

umm hello I need help with making an article I do not know what to write about oh and can I write things like a fake article about a fake company or not ok thank you all bye. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Politicalfan123ab (talk • contribs) 17:31, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Politicalfan123ab: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. No, you cannot create a "fake article" about a fake anything. This is a serious project, and if you are not prepared to make serious contributions to it, you should spend your time somewhere that does permit you to just fool around. If you are interested in being a serious Wikipedia contributor, you don't need to create articles to do so, especially if you don't know what you want to write about. 331dot (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

i very confused on howe to work the wikipedia I am 80% spanish. Some1 sersly help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B.burton123 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

If you'd prefer to work in Spanish, the Spanish Wikipedia is at https://es.wikipedia.org

how can a block or report vandalism on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reedus.norman (talk • contribs) 18:07, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

You can report persistent vandalism at WP:AIV, but be sure it really is WP:VANDALISM and not simply ineptitude. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2018 (UTC)