Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 454

Archive 450

←

Archive 452

Archive 453

Archive 454

Archive 455

Archive 456

→

Archive 460

Improving the article, about Dr. Sudip Bose

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello Everyone,

I am new to Wikipedia and need some help to write an article. Basically I want to re-write the article on Dr. Sudip Bose distributed in the following sections:

1. Early life and education
2. Career - here I want to talk about his current involvement
3. Operation Iraqi Freedom - here I want to talk about his service in Iraq
4. The Battle Continues - here I want to talk about the charity that he started

I have edited the article as far as I can. Appreciate if you guys can help to improve it.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Utsavde39 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Utsavde39:

1. When you post to a talk or discussion page, such as this one, always sign with four tildes: ~~~~. That will appear as your username, with links and a timestamp. (See the end of my comment here.)
2. When you mention an article on such a page, always identify it clearly— which you did— and preferably provide a wikilink— which you did not, so I have just added it.--Thnidu (talk) 05:55, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks @Thindu for your help. Utsavde39 (talk) 06:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@Utsavde39: I notice that you wrote at User_talk:Doc_James, " I personally know Dr. Bose, and he requested me to improve this article. Just added back the personal data in the article. Need input from you to make this part proper. Any help is appreciated. Please don't remove the whole part, just comment." You seem to misunderstand how Wikipedia works. It is not Dr. Bose's article but Wikipedia's article about him. Wikipedia has little if any interest in what Dr. Bose wants the article to say. And his request does not give you the right to control the article. —teb728 t c 06:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

In some areas of editing I believe there are also links at the top of the edit page that provide for signing the edit. Specifically, the talk pages. I am unsure why this page is not set up the same way. On another note, I believe that the person or other entity that specific articles are about should have some impact on the quality, quantity and accuracy of information in order to make articles as honest and reliable as possible. Rrrof711 (talk) 07:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guideline encourages the subject to suggest/request changes on the article talk page. But they are "strongly discourged" from editing the article directly and have no right to take the control the article. —teb728 t c 08:44, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Utsavde39, if you decide to continue working on that article (which is discouraged but not forbidden), my advice to you is to forget absolutely everything you know about Bose, and confine yourself to information which has been published by somebody unconnected with him. That excludes not only his own and his organisations' websites, but also any interviews with him, and any article written from press releases from him or his organisations. Even in the headings you've suggested above: the first two are all right, "Operation Iraqi Freedom" is fine if that is the name of the organisation, and independent sources have written about it; but "the battle continues" is an interpretation which must not appear in a Wikipedia article unless it is directly quoting an independent reliable source - and in that case, I doubt that it would be suitable as a header.

Essentially what is going on is that, like many, many people who are not familiar with Wikipedia, you have come here to promote Bose: to tell the world about him in language of his choosing. This is not allowed on Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk)

ColinFine

Operation Iraqi Freedom was a term used for the Iraq War in the United States, as you can see if you click on the link. "The Battle Continues" is where Utsavde39 wants to talk about a charity, in which case your advice about the name of the organization and independent sources would still apply.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:26, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for helping me on this case. I do not want to PROMOTE sudip bose at any case. Just wanted to re-write the article like other veterans/speakers in Wiki.

I have made a few changes in the article, let me know if this version is ok

Utsavde39 (talk) 05:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I small help, how to mention "he is a motivational speaker" somewhere in the article. A Lot of the existing references says it. Utsavde39 (talk) 05:17, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@Utsavde39: You added that to the article, but another editor removed it with the edit summary "rm. obviously promotional claims". When there is a content dispute like this, the prime place to discuss it is on the article talk page (Talk:Sudip Bose). —teb728 t c 07:22, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tenor Saxophone Players--add Flip Phillips. See "Poor Butterfly" on youtube. One of the Greats!

I found this but don't know how to add something to an Article on a Search. Thank you. 199.47.65.61 (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. Thanks for looking into our coverage of musicians. It looks like we have an article, Flip Phillips, which is categorized in Category:American jazz tenor saxophonists and listed on List of saxophonists. If you see his name missing anywhere, though, you can bring up the issue at Talk:Flip Phillips, or you could add it yourself! If you're looking to add specific YouTube videos, that's something that we generally don't do. Instead, we prefer to link to one official website, then allow people to navigate to other links from there. It keeps our articles tidy and comfortable to read. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 14:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Is updating (within an infobox company) an old logo to the current version considered conflict-of-interest

Am trying to determine if updating an old logo that is currently posted (in an "infobox company" on an existing article) to its current version would be considered a conflict of interest if done by an employee of that company?

If so, what would be the best-practice method to otherwise handle such. WylerKeith (talk) 08:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, WylerKeith! The best way for a conflict-of-interest editor to make changes to an article is by making a request on the talk page, stating clearly what you would like to see changed and why. You can use {{request edit}} to attract the attention of other editors to your request. Good luck! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

That's true in general, Justlettersandnumbers; but adding or updating images is one of the things that COI editors are usually allowed to do, provided there is nothing potentially contentious in what they're doing. I take it that this applies to logos as well. Please read WP:Logos before uploading, WylerKeith. --ColinFine (talk) 16:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Tsunesaburō Makiguchi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I was forwarded here by EAR on an article on Tsunesaburō Makiguchi. For obvious reasons I cannot do much to edit the article. So here goes my original request: Even though I have retired from en.wikipedia this edit has caught my attention [1]. In the talk page the reasons for the edit has been given as follows: [2]. Besides the fact that the edit as such is purely POV it also defies logic. How can a group founded in the twentieth century predate a group originally founded in the late nineteenth century?? Besides that the edit deletes well-resourced material. The reason for me turning to this noticeboard is that I am officially banned from articles relating to Nichiren Buddhism. For that reason I decided to retire … none the less I fear that certain articles on the subject are being white washed yet again. If anyone does find interest in the subject / matter please also contact me via mail as I do not log in regulary anymore. --Catflap08 (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

I was unaware that asking questions on an edit that I find being problematic on a subject [[3]] that I was banned on is already a violation of a ban in itself [[4]]. I was also unaware that when following an advice given, using a help page - at least what I thought of being a place for asking questions, and then even following the advice is worse than anything else. This all is getting very strange indeed. --Catflap08 (talk) 19:56, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Catflap08. Please let me clarify. When an editor is subject to a topic ban, Nichiren Buddhism in your case, then that is a complete ban on editing, discussing, hinting at, or alluding to that topic, broadly construed, everywhere on Wikipedia. So, your comments above are a violation of your topic ban. Please stay away from that topic 100%. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@ Cullen³²⁸ Well could one communicate that to the ones answering questions at [email protected] too then? Let me also notice that this means there is no procedure which allows those banned from a topic, while adhering to a decision, to still indicate that indeed problematic edits have taken place. After all this … even after asking if there is such a procedure exists … is in effect censorship. --Catflap08 (talk) 11:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

No censorship is involved, Catflap08, because this is a private website without governmental power. The community decided that your behavior (and that of one other editor) was disruptive in the Nichiren Buddhism topic area. You are 100% topic banned. Period. That clearly includes pointing out perceived problems with related articles. Please move on, and say nothing further about this topic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry cannot do that as I officially contacted Wikipedia and was advised to do what I have done. It’s you guys not me who have a very severe problem. It does not need governmental input to talk of censorship – as this is what is taking place. Fact IS that there is no place to turn to, when faced with a ban, that guidelines are being pushed. I am not even asking for immediate action but I know when somebody bullshits me. Please note that I am not known to use foul language, but this was Okayed against me under other circumstances. In the end of the day I as an individual trying to adhere to a ban has no way to turn to when I see guidelines being disregarded – that is all I wanted to know. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Cullen³²⁸ There is no place to move on to as this is the place I moved to in order to find and file impartial reliable references on a subject to be a prime focus. I do know now that is not the case. I also do know now that after having worked on a somewhat contentious issue some advocates do get their way. Please do also note that I have not edited any article on Nichiren Buddhsim ever since the ban was imposed. Living on a continent that has seen many forms of censorship be rest assured – THIS IS CENSORSHIP. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:33, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

This conversation is an ongoing violation of your topic ban, Catflap08, and I again advise you to cease and desist. This is not a 100% "free speech zone" and you are under restrictions because of your disruptive behavior. Go edit some of the other five million articles here. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@ Cullen³²⁸ Please by all means do not take this personal. I know that even naming this area the Tea House Wikipedia is trying to create a little cosy atmosphere to chit chat. After what I went through I know that Wikipedia is facing its limits. Objectivity is desired but not achieved. Five million other articles do not interest me but the ones that are being misused. I leave it there. --Catflap08 (talk) 18:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Sandbox and new article

I just created my first new article, Nicolo Schiro. After a minor hiccup, it's been accepted, posted and there's nothing wrong with the article itself. However when I looked at the article's revision history my complete history of sandbox revisions I did before editing other articles and talk pages are included in the article's history. See here, here, here, and when I was just starting out and learning to type source code and formatting here. Is there any way I can remove this prior sandbox revision history from the article, especially since a lot of it is from before I even started writing the article? Libertybison (talk) 23:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Libertybison, and welcome to the Teahouse. Is there are particular reason for your concern about the article history being visible? It is technically possible to supress some article revisions, but this is usually only done to remove non-public personal information, potentially libelous information, copyright infringement, etc. Generally, it's useful to maintain a page history so that we can tell who added what to an article and when, in case there are questions about the veracity of material later on. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:22, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations on your first article, by the way. It looks like a very good one at that. Another good reason for having the page history is so that you get credit for writing stuff like this! Cordless Larry (talk) 08:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

There's nothing really like what you describe above. It's mostly tests before editing other articles and talk pages. Also drafting before posting to talk pages of other editors and learning to type source code (I still prefer to use the visual editor) I don't mind keeping the revision history for the Schiro article but I just checked the article's revision history and I didn't start writing the article until 05 February 2016 but it has the revision history of my sandbox all the way back to August 2015. Also I blanked the Schiro article in my sandbox to work on edits to other articles and then reverted it back. I guess it's just a little embarrassing. Although, I do believe that the 50 most recent edits on the first page of the revision history are all article edits. Do you know if it's possible for a user to have 2 sandboxed, one for creating an article and another for just testing potential edits or drafts? Libertybison (talk) 09:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Blanking an article or sandbox doesn't eliminate it history, Libertybison. Only having it deleted will do that. If an article is moved from a sandbox to mainspace, then the history of the sandbox will move with it. I see your point about the sandbox previously having been used for other purposes, though. Do any other editors know if this is a good reason to supress revisions? In future, you can use as many sandboxes as you like, and give them names to identify them, such as User:Libertybison\Sandbox 1 or User:Libertybison\Test edits. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:10, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The start of the work seems to be the edit on 00:32, February 5, 2016‎. It would seem reasonable to suppress earlier edits since they relate to other topics. For future projects, I would use a named sandbox such as User:Libertybison\New Topic or use draft space. Dbfirs 10:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice Dbfirs and Cordless Larry! I went and found the guidelines page on revision suppression but it doesn't mention this exact issue, although it does say nonrelevant edits during a page merger can be suppressed in the revision history. I'll contact one of the admins listed to see if my situation applies. Oh and Cordless Larry, thanks for the kind words about my article. Libertybison (talk) 19:38, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, Libertybison. Pointing the admin to this discussion might help. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

For future reference, this issue was resolved by an admin at Libertybison's request, as described here. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:36, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Ollo Kambou

I reviewed Draft:Ollo Kambou and declined it. In the absence of wikilinks to the teams that the subject played on, and the absence of a specific statement, I can’t determine whether he played on a Tier 1 team and so meets association football notability. I also mentioned that the draft appears to be an autobiography, the submission of which is discouraged. (However, if I see that he does meet an automatic notability guideline, I feel a duty to accept it in spite of disapproving of autobiographies.

User:Kambollo then asked at my talk page: “You just declined our new page - understandable as I'm new at this and not sure how to link webpages, which is the reason you gave for rejecting our submission. I did however cite as many webpages as possible and many of those include rosters for the teams on which he played. Could you give me more feedback as to what we did wrong and how to correct it?” First, I would ask who is “we” in referring to “our new web page” and why there is a reference to “the teams on which he played.”. Is this a shared account? Can someone please direct this person or group to information on wikilinking? What is needed is to identify a particular Tier 1 team on which he played. Also, please read the conflict of interest policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The we is my husband and me. My husband is Ollo Kambou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kambollo (talk • contribs) 19:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

So then how do we get an article about him...?? I have not put any subjective material. I backed up every detail with objective material with no personal connection to anyone in our family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kambollo (talk • contribs) 19:23, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Also, have you seen all the cited webpages? I think they contain the information you are looking for.

Quite a few of your sources are other Wikipedia articles, Kambollo. Wikipedia articles can't be used as sources for other Wikipedia articles, for perhaps obvious reasons. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry if this all because of my ignorance, but I feel that we proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he played for Yadanarbon FC, a team recognized by FIFA as a member of the Myanmar National League. Also, Manaw Myay FC is another team in the Myanmar National League (MNL). Does that not meet your qualifications for a Tier 1 team? Also, 10 of my 33 sources are from Wikipedia. Almost every single one contains information that is also in other listed non-wiki sources. Also, if I, as his wife, cannot write his biography, who can I get to create this site?

I appreciate all the feedback. Ollo Kambou 20:47, 19 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kambollo (talk • contribs)

Can someone please direct Uer:Kambollo to advice on how to link to other articles? They need, at a minimum, to link the names of the professional teams and professional league, but, more generally, they need to add as many links as will improve the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

User:Kambollo - Read the user name policy. Sharing an account between family members is not permitted. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

We don't care if the 10 (out of 33) sources include information that is also in non-wiki sources. That doesn't justify listing the 10 articles as sources. There should be 23 sources and the Wikipedia articles should be wikilinks or See Also listings. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Kambollo, if you want to request that someone else write the article, you can do so via Wikipedia:Requested articles. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:28, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Looks to me that they've never played in a fully professional league, and so fails WP:NFOOTY. Seems to fail WP:GNG as well. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

The Myanmar National League is listed as a fully professional league and Yadanarbon FC is in it. As the draft is written, with no wikilinks, it wasn't obvious to me that they had played in a fully professional league. Robert McClenon (talk)b

Still no one has guided me on how to create a wikilink, but for some reason a person two subjects after me got an answer. I will attempt to create those tomorrow. As for all the hate, I don't get it. My husband is with me - he could say he authored the article (because it's on his username) but doesn't speak English as fluently as I do. I feel like most of the replies were short, rude and unnecessary while other people got very helpful replies. I'm doing my best here.

Ollo Kambou 03:28, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies if you got that impression, Kambollo. Many editors dislike conflict of interest editing, which perhaps explains the attitude of some of the respondents. There is a guide to linking at Wikipedia:Tutorial/Wikipedia links. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:29, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

DESiegel and I have helped clean up the text somewhat, Kambollo, and DES has added some links. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:05, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the help. I appreciate the apology as well, as I am way out of my element with this. It appears that my lack of IT jargon is not boding well for me.

Again, I am more than appreciative for all of the help you have offered. I will try to clean it up a bit and submit again.

Ollo Kambou 14:49, 20 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kambollo (talk • contribs)

Another tip, Kambollo: you should sign your comments here and on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~), rather than by manually typing out your user name and the time (which appears to be what you are doing). Cordless Larry (talk) 14:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Actually, I usually forget to sign at all. But I only manually typed it once - in a different "talk" box for one of your talk pages and it wouldn't allow me to use the four tildes. Other than that, I use the tildes.. (Ollo Kambou 22:05, 20 February 2016 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kambollo (talk • contribs)

Do not remove the previous AFC decline notices and templates. (They say "Do not remove". They will be removed when the draft is accepted by the script that processes the acceptance.) That is considered disruptive editing, and, if done more than once (the first time may be a good-faith misunderstanding), may result in the draft being nominated for deletion or in a warning or block. (Maybe you didn't know not to remove them. Now you do know.) Robert McClenon (talk) 22:57, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

How does "Submit your Draft for Review" work?

Hi, I created an entry for NSW Environment Protection Authority which was deleted for copyright infringement. I also work for the organisation and so was advised to add the Connected Contributor Template to the page. I have added this to my talk page, and would be happy to add it to the talk page of the article once published. In the meantime I have rewritten the main page in my sandbox at <htps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kagey2005/sandbox> and hit the "Submit your Draft for Review" button, but I've not heard anything back. Am I doing something wrong? Kagey2005 (talk) 05:06, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Kagey2005, I don't know what you did (or more likely didn't), but your draft was not submitted. I have done that for you. John from Idegon (talk) 05:49, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks John. All I did was click on the button. Glad it is submitted now. Kagey2005 (talk) 05:54, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Yea, that opens an edit window which you then must save. Not intuitive at all. And be forwarned, it is not anywhere near the last non-intuitive thing you will encounter here. Us Teahouse hosts have great job security John from Idegon (talk) 06:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Replicating tables from peer sites

Thank you for the generated offer to help with editing. I'm sure the solution is very simple and I wanted to figure it out myself. But I have received other notices about citations and references. There is no point asking for any editing help if I cannot first convince Wikipedia editors of the page's relevance. So please, let me explain who I am and why I think this article is needed. If you agree, I will post my editing question about tables. I was recently hired to do PR for the international Korean-based law firm in question, DR & AJU. But that is not why, I'm building a Wikipedia article about it. I read Wikipedia's guidelines carefully and only decided to invest the time when we found numerous third-party references about the firm in English- and Korean-language journals and books. The firm is involved in cases with international coverage and is a good example of the changes occurring in the Korean legal market following FTAs with the EU and the U.S. My first task here was to compare law firms' social media presence. While all the Western firms I studied had Wikipedia pages on the English site, only two Korean firms are listed. The largest firm (Kim & Chang) and Yulchon (linked below with a "multiple issues" warning on its page. I did not begin this project until I was sure this firm's page could avoid all the issues raised with Yulchon's presence. I understand the guidelines and directions for references and citations. I don't foresee problems with those. What I am having problems with is getting a table to match those in related sites -- specifically the general summary (headquarters, No. offices, etc.) listed in these two example pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taylor_Wessing and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yulchon. In the meantime I will skip that table and start adding the citations and references. Please look at the page after 4:00 am ET Friday, Feb. 19. If you feel it meets Wikipedia's criteria for a commercial business and I still have not figured out how to do the table properly, I will post my question. One last thing, if I need to do volunteer editing prior to the article being accepted, I will gladly comply. I have an MA in Korean studies and am a native English speaker, so I would feel confident editing Korean history and culture-related articles in need of grammar or style correction. Another area I may be able to be of help is your in-house pages describing how to post questions to this Teahouse and/or create tables in Wikipedia. To younger readers or those with ample Wikipedia editing experience they are clear, I'm sure. But I think middle-aged novices, like myself, might relate better to different wording and examples. I respect what you have done and are doing. I would enjoy being a part of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LegalKorea (talk • contribs) 03:42, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@LegalKorea: You say, "I was recently hired to do PR for the international Korean-based law firm in question, DR & AJU." Please see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. In brief, Wikipedia generally does not allow articles that people have written about themselves, their close family members, their employers, or anyone else with whose interests they are closely aligned.--Thnidu (talk) 05:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Thindu, for the feedback. I read the policy and if it expressly forbade related parties from writing articles, I would not have started this project. But there is a caveat that if the employee openly discloses the association, writes a neutral piece based on third-party sources and allows critical references added later to stay posted, the article could be accepted. I plan to comply with all of these stipulations. That is why I'm asking editors to verify that the subject is notable and the article neutral before I waste their time with minor editing questions. Also if there were not already many Western firms on Wikipedia and only two Korean firms, I would not have started. But as the point of Wikipedia is to spread knowledge, shouldn't that knowledge include the existence of different kinds of firms -- especially in a time of global liberalization of the legal services market -- provided those firms are engaged in work of international relevance? LegalKorea (talk) 06:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't see where you have complied with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. —teb728 t c 07:59, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, LegalKorea. In answer to your question, that 'table' is called an infobox. If you edit one of those other articles, you will see, near the top {{infobox law firm}} (or possibly another infobox, but I'm guessing that is the one used. You need to copy that, all the way down to the matching double curly bracket, and paste it into the article you're working on; then you can change the values of the fields accordingly. Note that you cannot just make up fields: if some of the fields in the template you're copying don't quite match your needs, you need to look at the documentation on the template (which I linked to above) which say what fields are available for that infobox.

One other point, which might seem a quibble, but I think it is important for you to understand. There is not one firm (or person, or anything else) in the world that "has" a Wikipedia article. On the contrary, Wikipedia has articles about many companies and people. And if anybody chooses to regard the existence or non-existence of a Wikipedia article about a company as relevant to that company's web presence, that is a matter of complete indifference to Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, ColinFine. Another editor, Teb728, was kind enough to add the infobox. Your suggestions and explanation are very useful. While I looked at related pages I never opened the "edit source" links to any, feeling that I had nothing to add and that it was the private content of the original contributor. I am starting to grasp the total Wikipedia package and methodology. It's been very enlightening. After I finish this page, I will look for others I can positively contribute to gain more experience. LegalKorea (talk) 06:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki helping projects

Wikipedia must create a project for a software designer, To design for helping children hgrow their minds and brain to be intelligent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bianca Levine (talk • contribs) 13:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Bianca Levine, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not quite sure what you are asking. I thought at first you were talking about an article about a particular software designer, but I don't think you are. Could you explain further, so we can direct you to somewhere suitable? (By the way saying "Wikipedia must" anything is not very enrolling: Wikipedia, in the sense of anybody who does anything, is the thousands and thousands of volunteers who edit and manage it, nothing else. So if you are asking for something to be created, you need to interest volunteers in your idea, not just state that "Wikipedia must" do something). --ColinFine (talk) 16:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Discussion continued on my talk page --ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Yesterday

I not speak English good yet, I learn. Yesterday tried explain philosophy question, no success. They do not understand. Maybe also little bad manners, they say to me: "Wittgenstein once wrote "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." --I am One of Many (talk) ". Maybe I do easy thing. I just learn now. Something I can do, to learn that easy for me? You suggest? Something to do. Michael Bergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 01:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC) — Preceding comment signed as by Michael Bergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk · contribs) actually added by Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk · contribs)

There is page called .Bergius not Sergius. Sometimes I am there, do not know how. After, changes signature.Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 02:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC) This page.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Michael_Bergius_Alexander_Ferdinand_Fedorovich ... not sign now because will start changing. Signature is Michael Alexander Sergius Ferdinand Fedorovich. Try Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 03:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

"Michael Bergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich" is not a registered username, but somehow has a talk page. The "Sergius" version is a normal username with a normal talk page. Maproom (talk) 08:51, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I do NOTHING. It is automatic .... I do not understand. Started after DES made a new page for me, spelling with B. After, just sinning both way. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC) Exactly. True. But why? Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I can't see how the page was created now, Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich, because it has been deleted. However, it's possible to create a page for a non-existent user by accident. Perhaps whoever created it accidentally inserted the "B" into the URL before they posted something on your user talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Exactly. So page is gone? OK, just mistake. I want to interest you in the first question. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 16:34, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Liz deleted it. I now realise how this must have happened - you have spelled your user name in your post above (and in your original post yesterday) with a "B". Someone probably followed the link and commented, hence creating the page. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Not me, it just happens. After visiting the page, start spelling Bergius. Automatic. Also sometimes arrive there, automatic. after, it sign Bergius. There was message from DES at Bergius page. Teahouse message to me. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 16:49, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

You have just changed your signature links to the "B" spelling, Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich. Don't do that - this is what causes people to post in the wrong place. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

YES! This not me! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions&curid=34745517&diff=706128762&oldid=706127871

Yes, I'm getting very confused about your identity. Just use four tildes "~~~~" to sign. See Wikipedia:Signatures. Dbfirs 17:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Дерьмо! It does again. It is automatic. I do nothing. I push signing button. Sometimes Bergius sometimes comes Sergius. Why? I do NOTHING. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 17:12, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm getting very confused / YES Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 17:13, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I do not change nothing myself. Never, it is automatic. Sometimes it comes Bergius, sometimes it comes Sergius, I do nothing. I push little button. It is automatic. I do not understand. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 17:18, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Started when there was message from DES at sudden new Bergius page. Teahouse message to me. After started signing both Bergius and Sergius. Automatic, I do really nothing. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 17:21, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Somebody do something. Stop this. Michael Sergius Alexander Ferdinand Fedorovich (talk) 17:39, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Redirection

I have just added a Wiktionary link to "Acacia homalophylla" giving its local name, "Yarran". The link is not pretty, but what I would like done (or to do), is to somehow set up for "Yarran" to redirect to "Acacia homalophylla". Wnholmes (talk) 04:08, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

See Help:Redirect -- you go to Yarran, write #REDIRECT [[Acacia homalophylla]], and hit "save". Eman235/talk 06:29, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. It's done.Wnholmes (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Footnote reference in quote in reference

I've just created Anne's Spot as a planetary science stub, after seeing it redlinked from Anticyclone. I did a bit of research and was able to write two sentences about it from two reliable sources. The second of those, Vasavada et al., gave further detail that I added in the quote field of the note. That quote references a third source, which I think needs to be credited properly, but I can't figure out how to add a reference from a reference. I've read the refn template doc, and maybe I'm too tired, but I just don't get it. Help, please?

Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 22:28, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Thnidu, While it is technically possible to have footnotes withing footnotes, in my view it usually leads to a confusing article, and should not be done unless there is not a better way to handle the situation. In this case, the better way is simple: move the quote into the article proper, with inline attribution. Then the footnote for the quoted reference can simply follow the quote. This will be much clearer. The article would read something like this:

Anne's Spot refers to a reddish-colored anticyclonic oval in Saturn's atmosphere, observed in 1977 by the Voyager space probes at 55°S. It may well also have been observed in 2004 by the Cassini orbiter, at about 53°S, one-third larger east-west, and with faster winds. Vasavada, Hörst and Kennedy write that: "It is tempting to speculate that this vortex is Anne's Spot from the Voyager era [Sánchez-Lavega et al., 2000]. If so, it has moved ~2° north in latitude and increased in velocity by ~25 m s−1, just as predicted by the zonal wind profile (in addition, its east-west diameter has increased from 3200 km to 4500 km)."

References

Does this method seem reasonable to you? DES ^(talk) 23:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Yes, indeed. Thank you for the advice, which I will take. --Thnidu (talk) 04:50, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Well, I tried it. I was unhappy about that quote taking up so much of such a short article, so I put it back to almost the way I'd had it, with a kludge in the refs to handle the ref-in-ref problem. --Thnidu (talk) 05:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I want to change my username, is it possible (Afghanjournalist (talk) 18:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I presume that you meant to post this as a new question, Afghanjournalist, although your edit summary was "response", which makes it sound like it is somehow related to this question. Anyway, you can read about changing your username at Wikipedia:Changing username. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:12, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

how do I make a page about something?

I want to make a page about myself without the "User:" in front of it. Can I delete the "User:" or can i make a new page?

-Alec Ferrari (talk) 21:23, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Alec Ferrari. For there to be an article about you or anyone or anything else, you need to meet our notability requirements, which essentially boil down to the need for significant coverage in reliable, independent sources such as newspapers or books. If this coverage exists, Wikipedia can have an article about you, but you are strongly discouraged from writing about yourself. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Alec. Please don't. Go to some service where such a profile fits with the type of site and form of work it is, such as LinkedIn, or a host of sites like that. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a very specific type of reference work that can be summarized as a compendium of articles on topics of knowledge—as reflected by the world writing about a topic in detail (and not by the the subject or those connected to the topic writing about it). We have no place here for a write-up on you, unless you are truly a topic of knowledge. And any such article would properly be written someone entirely unconnected to you. It would also have to demonstrate notability by the world having taken note of you by writing about you substantively in reliable, secondary sources, e.g., mainstream newspapers that have written articles about you. Unless you're notable, you user page is really the only place where a write-up about you would be appropriate at all, and even there it should not be anything like a fake article, but rather related to your activities and goals here as a contributor to this writing project. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:35, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

How to tell which of your edits is your (#)th

Hello, I have recently asked a question in regard of how many pages I have edited, and have been referred to this page: https://tools.wmflabs.org/xtools-ec/?user=KnowledgeIsGoodForYou&project=en.wikipedia.org

However, I need help finding which of my edits is my (insert number here)th, and so forth, so I could add it to my milestones profile page.

I am currently a month-old Wikipedia editor that is still new to the Wikipedia format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KnowledgeIsGoodForYou (talk • contribs) 14:38, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

KnowledgeIsGoodForYou, the simplest way to do that is probably to go to this page and count up from the bottom of the list. Your first 100 edits are these. HTH. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 15:37, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey, go to "preferences" at the top meny bar, and then it says "Number of edits: XXXX" // Psemmler (talk) 00:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost

How do I get The Signpost overview on my talk page? --Knick Knurrikoff (talk) 16:13, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Knick Knurrikoff. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Subscribe. If you any difficulty with following the instructions there, please feel fee to follow-up here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:26, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! --Knick Knurrikoff (talk) 01:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

how do I hire someone to do a wikipedia account for me?

Hi how do I contact someone to hire to create a wikepedia account for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FCC8:BA43:B900:5CAF:A00F:3FA3:D1EE (talk) 05:27, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

What you do you want to do? Do you want to create a Wikipedia account, a registered account, to edit Wikipedia from with a name rather than an IP address? Or do you want to hire someone to create a Wikipedia article about you? The answer to the first is: Just do it. It takes about five minutes, although some of the privileges of having an account only apply after four days and ten edits. All unregistered editors, that is, editors from IP addresses without user names, are encouraged to register accounts. You don't hire anyone. If you want to hire someone to create a Wikipedia article about you, don't. That has multiple policy problems. Wikipedia strongly disapproves of paid editing. Also, if you aren't notable in the Wikipedia sense of having been referred to by independent reliable sources, the article will almost certainly be deleted. What are you asking? If you are asking how to create a Wikipedia account, just do it; it is easy. If you are asking how to hire someone to write a Wikipedia article about you, don't. The article will be deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Or are you asking about hiring someone to write an article about someone or something else? Like Robert, I didn't really understand what your question was about, as creating a user account is pretty simple. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:37, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

What happened to the new editing I did 24 hours ago

I wrote additions to 'When A Blind Man Cries', 'Showdown (Electric Light Orchestra) & 'Heart Full of Soul' with citations and they were there for two hours at least but now they have disappeared. What did I do wrong? GLambvick (talk) 09:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

If you look at the edit history of When A Blind Man Cries, you will see that your edit was removed by User:Ojorojo in this edit, with the comment "see WP:NOTPROMOTION". That was a little harsh, IMHO. You could do with the removal of the reference to "a female perspective", as that could be construed as WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH, and you should find a reliable independent source to back up the information. Rojomoke (talk) 10:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi GLambvick and welcome to the Teahouse. The editor who reverted you also left a longer explanation on your talk page. The problem is that famous songs usually have many, many cover versions. the vast majority of which are not notable. If the band doing the cover, i.e. Annee 2CU Blues Band, does not have an article, and their album has not been reviewed in published sources completely independent of the band, then it doesn't belong in an article about the song, and does appear to be promotional, since the references link solely to the band's website. Also, if you have any connection whatsoever to this band or any of its members, you need to read this page for guidance when editing under those circumstances. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 10:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. GLambvick (talk) 10:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:Rajeswari Paled Tress

I reviewed Draft:Rajeswari Paled Tress, as did other editors. Some of us declined it based on the need for in-line citations, and some of us declined it on the failure to provide references establishing notability. (These declines are really two versions of the same thing.) User:Rajtress then wrote to my talk page:

Hello, Can you please provide an example which will help me edit the content.

First, while it is fine to look at existing articles to see what is acceptable, it is easy for new editors to use one particular article as a prototype and try to produce a draft that parallels it, and meet with rejection, so I won’t provide an example. Maybe another experienced editor will. Second, the original poster was twice told to add footnotes, and was also twice told to provide references to independent reliable sources, and has not added footnotes. If the original poster doesn’t understand how to add footnotes, and has already read referencing for beginners, then they can ask a specific question here, and we will be glad to advise them. Third, the usual step in trying to get independent reliable sources is to Google on the subject, and see whether any of the top hits appear to be independent reliable sources, and use several of them. However, fourth, as to how should you edit the content of an autobiography to get it accepted, the usual advice is: Don’t try. You probably aren’t notable in the peculiar Wikipedia sense. If you are, someone else can write the article about you. Also, even if you are notable, you are likely to write a non-neutral autobiography (one of the various reasons for the conflict of interest policy), and are likely to include peacock language, and the draft includes a lot of it.

Do other experienced editors here have additional or other advice? Robert McClenon (talk) 17:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Film Page rejected

Hi, I've added a page recently and I tried to use the guidelines but still didn't manage to create the content table and the right side with the film crew. I also received a message saying the page would be deleted, not quite sure why because the project is real, I've got the copyright to prove it and it doesn't have any information that goes against the wikipedia rules. Really need some advise please. Many Thanks Sofia.c.canali (talk) 14:21, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

The reason for the deletion was explained on your talk page. For an article to be accepted in Wikipedia, it is not enough for its subject to be "real"; it must have been discussed in several reliable independent published sources (something that we call "notable" here). Maproom (talk) 15:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I have two comments. First, your draft has been saved from proposed deletion because an experienced editor moved it to Draft:Abduct (2016 film), where you can submit it for review and get advice on how to improve it. You will need to provide more independent reliable sources. Has the movie been released in theaters yet? If so, please provide movie reviews. If not, unreleased films are seldom notable unless there has been publicity about their production. Second, you say that the project is real and you have the copyright to prove it. That creates two additional complications. You have a conflict of interest, and are likely to be seen as being here to promote the movie rather than to build the encyclopedia, and are not likely to be neutral. Also, many new Wikipedia editors do not understand about Wikipedia and one's own copyright. You cannot post your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia, even with your own permission, unless you explicitly release the copyright either under a CC-BY-SA copyleft or into the public domain, and, when you release the copyright, you are not releasing it only for Wikipedia; you are releasing it, under terms of CC-BY-SA, to all in the world. Your draft will probably now be scrutinized carefully for copyright violation. Even if it passes, it will then be reviewed for neutrality. However, it has been saved from deletion by being moved into draft space. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:30, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Draft:ULTRANET

I reviewed Draft:ULTRANET and declined it, requesting more independent reliable sources about the network and the network project. User:Hvdc news then posted the following to my talk page:

"Dear Mr. McClenon, Thank you for the review. However, I am trying to put up an English page for one in German is already existing. You mention more references: I included them. The link to English references is difficult since it is a German project. Wikipedia will be the reference at the end for the English speaking community. Please check the German wikipedia site to verify the need."

If I understand correctly, they are saying that the English Wikipedia article will list the German Wikipedia article as a reference. It isn’t absolutely clear on reading the policy that citing Wikipedia as a source is unacceptable circular referencing that a foreign Wikipedia, like the English Wikipedia, is not a source. However, Use Common Sense would appear to me to mean that the English Wikipedia should not cite the German Wikipedia. While English references are always preferred, reliable German references are acceptable, so that the references from the German Wikipedia may be copied into the English draft. Am I correct that the German Wikipedia may not be cited as a source?

Also, what is the correct form for linking to the German article? (If the German article is more complete, German-literate readers may prefer to read it rather than the English article.) Is that an external link? It isn’t really external. Is there a specific way to provide a link to a page in a non-English Wikipedia? Robert McClenon (talk) 22:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Robert McClenon:

• Yes, we should not cite the German-langauge Wikipedia. if WP:CIRCULAR isn't fully clear on that (and it should be) WP:RS is: the DE-Wikipedia, like most wikis, relies on user-generated content, and so is not a reliable source. It could be cited in an article about that edition of Wikipedia, for evidence on what it said, but not to support other content.
• To add the German-language article to the list of interlanguage links, include [[de:<Title of german article>]] Traditionally this goes at the bottom, like a category, but it works anywhere in the article. To DISPLAY such alink, for example in the See Also section, include [[:de:<Title of german article>]] (note the leading colon). The same can be done using any of the language codes that correspond to actual Wikipedia editions. The interlanguage link can also be done via the wikidata item for the article. DES ^(talk) 23:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Interlanguage links are handled at Wikidata now, not by code at the foot of the article. I don't think the See Also section would be an appropriate place for an ILL either.--ukexpat (talk) 02:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Only mainspace articles get linked through Wikidata, not drafts. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:02, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Indeed so, but ILLs should not be added to a draft in any event, but added later via Wikidata if the draft is accepted.--ukexpat (talk) 01:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello. I did not mean to cite the German site. The German site, imo, is to biased, using newspaper or praesentation references, not in an impartial way, giving little detail about the actual project, but opinion.

I will, if the Draft is accepted later, link that one as English version of on wikidata, if this is possbile. I need help on how to make this site live, without translating the German website. I will elaborate the Draft when possible in the near future. Links to lets say English speaking references are difficult. That is what I meant by the English version will hold as reference for the project later on worldwide... Greetings hvdc_news Hvdc news (talk) 19:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I want to create a Wikipedia article

Hi, I want to create a Wikipedia article of a company, please guide me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.177.40.223 (talk) 11:58, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse! There's a lot of advice on how to go about creating your first article at Wikipedia:Your first article. Bear in mind not every company qualifies for an article on Wikipedia; for a company to have an article about it on Wikipedia, it should meet the guidelines described at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Good luck! —me_and 19:40, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. As well as the good advice me_and has given you, I would very strongly advise you to spend some time improving some of our five million existing article first. There are two reasons for this: one is that creating a new article is hard and you will probably encounter very much less frustration if you already have experience about how Wikipedia works. Secondly, it will establish that you are here to improve the encyclopaedia, and not just to publicise a particular company. --ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Template merge pending

Hello, the merger of {{Infobox Jain temple}} into {{Infobox religious building}} was initiated long ago. It is still bearing the tag, though the merger was never actually initiated. Can someone please guide me what are the options available? -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 19:17, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Capankajsmilyo it looks like there wasn't clear consensus to merge. However, I will ask Plastikspork to explain the reasoning behind the statement.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:14, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

And it appears this user is semi-retired, which won't help. I could ask someone else.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:24, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing may have some idea what to do.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)