Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 52

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.

Archive 45

←

Archive 50

Archive 51

Archive 52

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

hi, i would like to make an edit in the article about train accidents. I find it a great article and very helpful. However, I don't know, if my story qualifies: On february 17 2011, I got hit by a train at the Main station in Winterthur, my leg was broken and I lost a lot of blood and went into a short coma. But I survived. Let me know, if you think this accident is worthy of being in your list. yours truly, F.B. (188.155.176.116 (talk) 19:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! If you can substantiate your story with reliable sources, then you can add it. Otherwise, it seems to me that it's original research. Thanks--Go Phightins! 19:37, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, it was not in the papers or on TV, if that's what you mean by reliable sources. And I have found anything on the Internet... I think that destroys my dreams of being mentioned on Wikipedia, forever... (If you had the time you could check with my doctor at the KSW, that's Kantonsspital Winterthur, but yeah, yeah, I know... It seems unlikely, doesn't it?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.155.176.116 (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, 188. Yes it is unlikely because that would still be original research. Wikipedia only publishes what has been written on in reliable second party sources, like newspapers or magazines. And although I am sure your accident will forever be a life changing thing for you, in a world-wide scheme of things, even you would have to admit it isn't very important. That is, unless some new legislation was enacted because of it. Then it could possibly be notable, but only if that story appeared somewhere in the media. Gtwfan52 (talk) 04:06, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

hi i just want to add my band to your list of punk rock bands. (208.188.159.100 (talk) 17:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, unless your band has received significant coverage that would allow it to pass our notability requirements, we probably won't be able to allow you to do so. Wikipedia is not for advertising. Sorry. Go Phightins! 17:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello - I am having difficulty adding an image to a couple of articles. I have a logo for the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen which I would like to add. But, when I go throug the protocals in "Upload file" the system will not allow me to upload it.

Would appreciate some help.

Thanks, David Dwhitewdc (talk) 17:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Welcome David! Are you trying to upload it at Wikimedia Commons? If so, you won't be allowed because logos are used under fair use, but the Commons doesn't allow fair use images. If you're trying to upload it here and are having difficulty, you may want to ask your question here. Sincerely, Go Phightins! 17:36, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Asien_Bd1.jpg In these site, world map in there. world map have seen right mark, but there are in the wrong mark. Between korea sea and japan sea name is East sea but in world, the sea name is sea of japan. so come up the correct notation in these site because A lot of people know the fact that it was looking at the map. As soon as possible corrective hope14.55.104.14 (talk) 14:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I don't understand your question - the area on the map you've linked to is labelled "Japen Meer", which translates (from the original German) as "Sea of Japan". Yunshui 雲‍水 14:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I see now - you want to use the Korean name "East Sea", rather than Sea of Japan. Leaving aside the fact that Wikipedia editors can't "correct" the map (it's from an 1892 German atlas), the current accepted international terminology for the Sea of Japan is - the Sea of Japan. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:29, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Just to add there is a whole article Sea of Japan naming dispute about the ongoing discussion as to the name of this sea. It has been discussed on Wikipedia too and the convention is to use Sea of Japan but mentioning East Sea - see WP:NC-SoJ for details. NtheP (talk) 15:56, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I am writing an article about a small topic that would better link into another more substantial article about the larger topic in hand . my article is about networked performance which is a type of digital theatre so my question is how do i go about adding my small article to the larger one? thankyou --MRPERRY145 (talk) 12:01, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

MRPERRY, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. My first impression is that possibly Networked theatre is a notable enough topic to stand on it's own, you draft would need some more references but I can see the topic being self standing. However if you don't think it is and that it should be a section in the articles, for example Digital theatre or Digital performance, then you can simply edit the existing article and include Networked theatre as a section within that other article. You might want to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre for a second opinion. NtheP (talk) 12:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I was wondering, how does an article move up on the quality scale? Thanks! Horai 551 (talk) 10:37, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse! Two of the highest grades are assessed by a panel of editors. FA-Class articles are assessed on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates and GA-Class articles are assessed on Wikipedia:Good article candidates. A-Class articles are assessed by WikiProject departments like Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment. The lower grades (B-Class, C-Class, Start, and Stub) are assessed by individual WikiProject members, and not several editors like the higher grades. Each quality grade has its own criteria, as listed on Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment. Hope that helps,--xanchester (t) 11:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

I already asked this question specifically to the editor, who declined my article on his Talk page. However, I thought it would be a good idea to ask the more of you. The article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Socialbakers is about a company called Socialbakers. Could you please read it and give me some feedback? Specifically, what have I done wrong and what needs to be rewritten so it would comply with the Wikipedia`s rules? Thanks, Michal.smetana (talk) 08:50, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Michal, I haven't read it in detail but certainly the tone is a lot better than it was and doesn't give me any problems. I still have concerns about the references though. Yes you have introduced several external references but still over 2/3rds of the references are from Socialbakers themselves and that is far too high a proportion. The number of references dependent on Socialbakers own site should be minimal and then only to verify simple, non-controversial facts, certainly nothing that needs an objective assessment regarding notability. Sorry to say that if I were reviewing the article now I would be declining it on that basis. NtheP (talk) 09:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

So, if I delete some of the references pointing directly to Socialbakers` website, do you think the article would be good to go for submission? Michal.smetana (talk) 09:46, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to the teahouse. The notability of the subject still has to be demonstrated by independent, published secondary sources, and to a lesser degree, tertiary sources. Also, the coverage must be significant and not trivial. A detailed article by the New York Times profiling the subject, for example, would serve as an excellent secondary source.--xanchester (t) 10:05, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

in utah 64.77.248.104 (talk) 02:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! I think you're looking for an answer about something related to the content of Wikipedia, not editing. That's totally okay, you should head over to the Reference Desk where they're a LOT better equipped to handle your question. Good luck! If you need help posting there, one of us Teahouse hosts can help you. All the best, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 05:33, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

This seems a dumb question. I created an article in my user space and then moved it successfully to Wikipedia. The title remains in my user space, together with a redirect message. Can I safely remove the title and redirect message - that is, delete the page in my user space without that action interfering with article in Wikipedia? Thanks so much Mdscottis (talk) 00:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

You're more than welcome to! There's actually a specific way to "delete" the redirect/page—just add the text {{db-author}} to the top of the page, and an administrator will come by and completely delete the page...with no harm to the actual one in the article space! Theopolisme _Boo! 01:22, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Mdscottis (talk) 01:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm trying to get a sentence deleted in the Circumcision article.

The sentence under discussion is misleading and advocating advice and support of circumcision.

This is the sentence under discussion- "Circumcision does not appear to have a negative impact on sexual function." GothHick49 (talk) 00:01, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

These sentences do not seem to agree with the sources. Summaries of the views of professional associations of physicians state that none recommend routine circumcision,[26][27] and that none recommend prohibiting the practice.[27]

This is what the first source says. Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors (2010) The official viewpoint of KNMG and other related medical/scientific organisations is that non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors is a violation of children’s rights to autonomy and physical integrity. Contrary to popular belief, circumcision can cause complications – bleeding, infection, urethral stricture and panic attacks are particularly common. KNMG is therefore urging a strong policy of deterrence. KNMG is calling upon doctors to actively and insistently inform parents who are considering the procedure of the absence of medical benefits and the danger of complications. GothHick49 (talk) 01:52, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi GothHick49 and welcome to the Teahouse! I think a better place to ask this question would be here, that way editors with a particular interest in the subject are more likely to see it and weigh in. Thanks again, and feel free to come back with any further questions you may have in the course of your editing of Wikipedia! Go Phightins! 02:29, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I have done that. But the editor that blocks my edits seems biased towards this article. I feel like I'm getting the Wiki-run-around. GothHick49 (talk) 03:16, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I cite these sources for being against circumcision, www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org ^[1]

arclaw.org ^[2]

http://www.nocirc.org/ ^[3]

http://www.intactamerica.org/ ^[4]

GothHick49 (talk) 03:58, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, GothHick49, and welcome! I see from the talk page over at Circumcision that Zad suggested you drop by here. Put simply, the edits you want to make to that article are not going to happen using the sources you've provided. I commend you for having gone off and read several policies and I especially commend your attempt to argue from those policies. Where you're having difficulty (as best I can tell) is understanding that the written policies are just a shorthand for the community consensus. You need to understand the consensus as well as the policies. (I have a few bumps on my head from just this problem so I know whereof I speak....) You're arguing (for example) that the article is not neutral for some — perhaps many — definitions of neutral. That argument may be logically correct, but a successful argument would have to be made based on the community consensus of what neutral means.

There's no shortcut for learning this: it comes from lots of reading, participating and making mistakes. Medical topics have their own sets of policies and consensuses on those policies above and beyond those in less fraught areas. If you're interested in helping us build and encyclopedia then mastering this body of knowledge is a good investment of you time. If your interest is limited to the circumcision article, then I'm not sure you want to invest a couple hundred hours learning how to make an effective argument for your changes. I hope it's the former, but I understand if it's the latter.

Best,

GaramondLethe 05:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, GothHick, and thanks for coming to the Teahouse. The internet is a vast place, and I am sure that just about any argument on any subject can be supported by something you might find on the internet. The is why Wikipedia insists on reliable sources. The simple explanation of reliable sources are fact-checked secondary sources such as newspapers, books, magazines or vetted journal compilations such as JAMA. Special interest websites like the ones you named exist to promote single viewpoints and as such are not considered reliable. Neither are white-supremacist websites on the subjects of race, or NAMBLA on the subject of pedophilia. If you can find articles in legitimate medical journals, by all means your information can be entered as another viewpoint. But the mainstream viewpoint will also remain. I hope this makes it all a little clearer. Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:25, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I was just wondering if I could get some advice about the iDMAa article I submitted on my sandbox. I modeled the article on several other articles written about similar arts organizations with similar citing styles, including Siggraph. I have just categorized the article as a art / arts organization stub, because I want to put it up in order for other people to add references and information to it? Is this the best course of action? What else can I do to the article to make it verifiable? Thanks Timegiftartists (talk) 15:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi there! Welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia. The biggest concern with the article, for me, right now, is the lack of reliable sources. In order to merit inclusion in Wikipedia - and show notability - you have to prove that it is just that, notable enough. To do that, you have to use reliable sources - sources that are from trustworthy places, for example, like coverage in newspapers and magazines. Inclusion in art books, biographies and journals are more examples. A reliable source is not a press release, or the website for the organization, which is basically what you used. Here is an example of an article I wrote about an arts organization which is in my hometown: Indianapolis Art Center. Perhaps that can help. You can use a bit of that for influence. We surely need improved arts coverage, so I hope you'll consider contributing more content beyond this one article! Thanks for coming by! SarahStierch (talk) 17:09, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello. How do I remove a label ""needs additional citations for verification"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibtisam_Mara'ana

I recently added new citations to confirm the information. How can I ask editors to check the page too see if the note can be removed yet or not?

Thanks PalindromeZ PalindromeZ (talk) 09:10, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

With that much refs now, I think you can most likely remove it... But let's hear from the others first. Btw, sure looks like it could do with some cleanup.. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 09:12, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

What kind of cleanup? Can you be more specific? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PalindromeZ (talk • contribs) 09:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Suree... Formatting, wikilinking... The usual cleanup. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 09:54, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Erm, when wiki linking, you need not, or should I say, should not enter the URL of the target article, but instead just the title, with the [[ ]] brackets.

Example: [[ <------Enter target article title here----> ]] You might wish to read up more and then try cleaning up again. :) Bonkers The Clown (talk) 10:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

thanks. PalindromeZ PalindromeZ —Preceding undated comment added 10:20, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I have created an article for AfC in wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Mysore_Cements_Limited. But has been rejected twice for insufficient references. I have added enough references available in News and Media which are totally reliable and independent of the article. Please guide me where I am missing out in Creation of new article in WP. I want to continue as good editor/creator of new articles in WP.

Thanks Chansa Harsha (talk) 09:04, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Chansa, and welcome to the Teahouse. Which references are you referring to? Of the citations listed, I can see only one which comes close to meeting the requirements for an independent source, the Himatsingka article in the Economic Times (currently footnote number 5). The others are either from the company's website or are derived directly from information produced by the company (e.g. the director's report, the company listing at India Infoline, the Worldwide Company Profile). The Economic Times article only contains minimal information about the company, and also looks to have been derived from a press release. What is required are multiple sources which are independent of the company, not business directory listings, company reports or press releases. Without such independent coverage in reliable sources, Mysore Cements does not meet the notability requirements for organisations. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:53, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Yunshui,

Can you give me some examples, how I can put notable references for this article?

Chansa Harsha (talk) 10:08, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Some examples of references which might count towards notability would be: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. None of these are particularly brilliant, but they all seem at first glance to satisfy the requirements. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:24, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I have a few different scripts installed and Twinkle, too. On Friday I woke up to notice that I was seeing a few things twice - my Twinkle tools, for example, are all listed twice on my Twinkle menus and I also have a script installed that allows me to see edit count/permissions/etc of editors by visiting their userpages - this is showing up twice, too. I'm not too savvy with script and Twinkle tweaks and installations. Anyone have any thoughts about why this is suddenly happening and how it can be rectified? I look at my vector.js and the scripts aren't doubled or anything... Thanks for your help! SarahStierch (talk) 16:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hey Sarah-- is it possible that they may also be copied to your common.js page? I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:57, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Good tip, I did have a few things doubled up - weird that they never showed up duplicated until recently. I did remove them from common.js but the edit count/gender script is still showing up twice. Hmmmm.... SarahStierch (talk) 21:26, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thoughts, anyone? SarahStierch (talk) 06:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Sarah, invoking IT help desk 101, copy the contents of your .js pages to Notebook, delete your .js pages, purge the cache and then recreate adding the scripts 1 by 1 checking behaviour after adding each one. A pain in the arse I know but if it doesn't work should identify which script is causing the problem. Chances are its a cache issue or a recent tweak to a script that are the problem. NtheP (talk) 07:34, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi

How would I go about writing an article on a service which is provided for free but the owners have commercial interests in it. Let me clarify with an example... Facebook is free to signup but serves ads and earns revenue. Now let's say that the company is not trademarked or displaying registration information. Therefore I would be under belief that using there logo on the article wouldn't be a copyright violation. Or would it? How would I get permission if it is violation. Furthermore what about screenshots of the service? Any other info on this??

Its my first article...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Airbender3 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 31 October 2012‎

Hello and welcome the the TeaHouse. I advise you to write the text of the article and find sources for it as the first things to do. They're the place to start. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Question moved to top of page. NtheP (talk) 23:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey all! I can't remember where to find the pages that talk about "why an article is not okay when it is just like this other article that exists". Can you remind me? heather walls (talk) 18:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Heather, welcome to the Teahouse! If I recall correctly, there are two: the one normally used is WP:OTHERSTUFF, which is a subset of "Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions", and there's also a full essay that expands on the principle at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Perfect! Thank you so much! heather walls (talk) 18:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello guests and hosts !

I'm a member of the New users project team on French Wikipedia. We are looking for the documentation about one of the teahouse features : the ask a question button and the wonderful question form. We would like to deploy it on the "Forum des nouveaux", a teahouse-like on French Wikipedia.

Thanks for your answers, Trizek ^{from FR} 14:06, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Trizek! It's always awesome to hear from people on other language Wikipedias! The question button and form is a sitewide opt-out Javascript gadget (it's on by default). The source code is at MediaWiki:Gadget-teahouse/content.js, and it's imported from MediaWiki:Gadget-teahouse.js. It'll take a few tweaks, but I don't think it would be that difficult to use it on the French Wikipedia. There's also a fallback built into the button itself for anyone who doesn't have the gadget (if they don't have Javascript enabled, for example) that basically turns it into a "New section" button. Is that what you're looking for? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:15, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot ! I have all answers I need ! Trizek ^{from FR} —Preceding undated comment added 14:19, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi there. In my initial attempts to contribute by improving some stubs about a subject I'm interested in, I seem to have inadvertently offended a more established editor who has protested thatthey should be 'left alone' to manage pages they created. That doesn't sound like how Wikipedia is meant to work, but I'm not here to create enemies. I've left what I hope is a friendly message on the other editor's talk page inviting collaboration, but have so far just got some fairly blunt language in return. I'm not offended by that, but I'd appreciate advice on the best way to avoid adding to tensions or unintentionally igniting an 'edit war'. Should I keep trying to contribute to this area of Wikipedia while continuing to offer the other editor olive branches, or just bow out and find a different area of the encyclopedia to contribute to?SnrRailways (talk) 13:17, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the teahouse! Wikipedia is the free Encyclopedia anyone can edit, and there is no so called "ownership" of an article. Reading what you wrote, the other editor seems kind of unfriendly, but we could settle things out and talk it out nicely. If its not a must to edit that desired article, then just abide by his wishes (though a bit unreasonable). After all, its always good to have less enemies! (But i understand, we always feel like we sort of "own" the article we create, Thats how i used to feel too! :))

I hope this helps. Once again, welcome to Wikipedia! Cheers!! Bonkers The Clown (talk) 13:28, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Bonkers (what a cool name, by the way). Yes, I can understand how the other editor feels, and as a newbie I guess I want to find people to co-operate with, not pick fights! Are you essentially suggesting that I try to find out what pages that editor really feels strongly should be 'hands off', then move on to another are of Wikipedia? That sounds OK to me.SnrRailways (talk) 14:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Well SnrRailways (what a cool compliment, by the way) Im not really encouraging such actions of an ownership claim over a certain article, but saying that if the editor really is sticky about it and you cant win the edit war, then just forget bout that article. It won't hurt and both sides are satisfied. :) Edit articles of your interest! Bonkers The Clown (talk) 14:11, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again - you're a wise clown! I'll see if the other editor responds to my previous message and try to have that conversation if and when they do. 'Grateful for your encouragement.SnrRailways (talk) 14:17, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

My view is really that Wikipedia is based on collaboration so the user shouldn't have issues with you assisting and really if the user does have issues then he/she should create the article in their own userspace and once it is completed they should publish it.

Alternatively use there sandbox. As far as possible, even though I am new to Wikipedia I would suggest avoiding edit wars as far as possible. Every subject has many articles that you could create/edit. Airbender3 (Talk) 22:42, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

• For additional information, see WP:OWN. Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:34, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I had submitted an article for creation and had received comments from a reviewer to do some alterations. I have followed the comments and edited the article. However, I do not know how to resubmit it. I have indicated my comments below the reviewer comments within the article itself and saved it. I also created a talk page for the article stating that I have edited the article. Is there a resubmission process, or any coding that I should put within the article for resubmission for review? Thanks for the help. Kevylyap (talk) 11:41, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Kevylyap, hi and welcome. Looks like you've already done it. Looking at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Pharmacocybernetics it's got the right banner at the top. If you need to resubmit again for any reason just add

{{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. One comment I'd make now about your draft is that you should change the hyperlinks to wikilinks. You have lots of linked terms to other articles which is great but you've used hyperlinks like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki/Medicine medicine] when the wikilink [[medicine]] does the job a lot more simply. NtheP (talk) 13:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

NtheP, thanks for the answer. I did not understand the difference between wikilinks and actual hyperlinks. I will change the wikipedia hyperlinks to wikilinks instead. Appreciate the help. Kevylyap (talk) 17:33, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

For the life of me I can't figure out where the citation needs ref tags. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Richards_Group

Maybe I'm using the edit function wrong. I wanted to add a citation about the clients list on this article. Daemperorofdaworld (talk) 13:29, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Daemperor, and welcome to the Teahouse. You'd placed a reference after the {{reflist}} template, meaning that the software couldn't parse it correctly. In addition, the citation template contained <ref> tags inside it, which also bewilders the poor Mediawiki software. I've fixed both issues for you. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:45, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Yunshui!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daemperorofdaworld (talk • contribs) 19:12, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Morning Wiki!

My first article added at Greenfish recirculation technology! Great fun!

I am however not shure I've departed from MOS in the GREENFISH disambig page? I found it more clear to present several fish species with the same common name in a table. Is this allowed.

Have a great night!

Björn Linden Urban Greenfish Urban Greenfish (talk) 05:24, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Bjorn, welcome to the Teahouse. Disambiguation is an interesting area, I could see what you were trying to do but I don't think it did meet with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages. Fish species isn't a strongpoint of mine (it's not even a very weak point!) but fortunately the issue of a common name being used by several species isn't new and there are loads of articles on them (see Category:Fish common names). So what I've done is made Greenfish a page solely for the fish species (layout based on Dragonfish) and moved all the other items, including a link to Greenfish to Greenfish (disambiguation). I've also checked the "What links here" for both pages to make sure that any links are pointing to the correct article. There were other methods that could have been used but this way allows you (or anyone else) to develop Greenfish into a full article, should you wish to do so. NtheP (talk) 13:44, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

HELLO.I WANT TO KNOW HOW I CAN CREATE A TEMPLATE IN WIKIPEDIA?Jaijibanswamiji (talk) 09:29, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Jaijibanswamiji, welcome to the Teahouse. Templates are created just like any other page on Wikipedia but are part of the Template namespace. You create one by naming your new page Template:name of your template. As templates can be quite complicated there are a number of places you can experiment before committing your page. These are the Template sandbox and the templates X1, X2, X3, X4, X5, X6, X7, X8 and X9.

Can I also ask that you switch off the caps lock key on your keyboard. Writing ALL IN CAPITALS, apart from being more difficult to read, is called shouting and can be considered rude behaviour by many editors. NtheP (talk) 10:14, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

thank you for your valuable suggestions.i did not know the concept of shouting.thanks once again NtheP.JaijibanswamijiJaijibanswamiji (talk) 16:38, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I am new at wikipedia recently a create one or two articles on wikipedia they are declined by wiki-members and I received a message that your article is declined due to advertisement or due to references.

Here is the article that I have posted:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Anchorfree

Please explain me what is wrong in this article as anchorfree is a reputable company also please give your tips of improvement so that I can modify it.

Satinder Singh (talk) 05:58, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Satinder Singh, and welcome to the teahouse. The reviewer's concern is actually that the article reads like an advertisement, not that the company is not notable (the word we use instead of "reputable". He is also concerned about a conflict of interest, since you wrote the word "our" in the security section. Are you an employee of the company or are somehow related to this company?

Having read your article, I would say that the "security" and "Products and Services" sections do sound like an advertisement. For example, you added the sentence "It has the ability to turn all your HTTP traffic into HTTP(S)". This sounds like a blatant advertisement, as it seems you are trying to promote the good points of this product/company. Perhaps you might want to reword these sections so it will sound more neutral?

Also, you might want to add some negative information of this company, if possible. For example, when it was used in the middle east uprising, did the governments there do something about it? (eg: block it/criticize it/targeted it) Of course, this needs to have some references as well. In conclusion, try to make the article sound more like something you would find in an encyclopedia, not the official website of the company. These are the problems I can spot so far... Hope this helps. Happy editing!--Lionratz (talk) 06:19, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

so i noticed that there are pictures in some wikipedias like the russian or the german wikipedias that dont exist in the english wikipedia articles, i cant just copy their name from their native wikipedias since i suppose they simple dont exist in the english wikipedia. How can i bring them into english wikipedia??--Venajaguardian (talk) 01:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the teahouse. If the pictures were uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, you should have no problem accessing them here using [[File:Whatevertheimagenameisoncommons.jpg]]. Could you link to the pictures? I'll be more than happy to help.--xanchester (t) 01:44, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey... I am new to Wikipedia. Where do I find tips on styling my talk/user pages. They seem bland at the moment and from viewing other users talk and user pages I developed a desire to improve mine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Airbender3 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Airbender, welcome to the Teahouse. The easiest way of designing your own user page is to have a look at other users and when you find ones that you like, view the source to the page and copy the bits of coding you like to your own page. NtheP (talk) 21:35, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome. You can also take a look at the user page design center if you'd like...it has some tips, templates, featured designs, etc. Go Phightins! 21:47, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah Thanks guys. User:Go Phightins! I had a look at the page design center! Great stuff!!! Airbender3 (Talk) 21:52, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Are images from flickr allowed, and if so what permission is needed? FOX 52 (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the teahouse. Certain images are allowed. See the chart on Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr. The license must be CC-BY, CC-BY-SA, or in the public domain. Hope that helps.--xanchester (t) 16:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi FOX 25 and welcome to the Teahouse! Images from Flickr can be uploaded at Wikipedia:Upload/Flickr. That page should give detailed information on whether an image is acceptable or not if the image was not created by you. However, if you created the image yourself, and you give permission to freely distribute the image, there shouldn't be any issue.

Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 16:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you FOX 52 (talk) 01:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

The independent country of Nagorno Karabakh is still shown in the current map of Azerbaijan. As the talkpage of Azerbaijan site discusses there should be a new map showing the real territory that goverment of Azerbaijan administers and has a legitimise to exercise its power.

There should be a map like Georgia (country) that currently excludes with a light colour South Ossetia and Abkhazia — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 13:08, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello IsrArmen, I'm generally familiar with that area so I get your point, but can you point out specifically which map(s) you're referring to? Are you referring to the main one at the top of Azerbaijan, this one here: File:Azerbaijan_(orthographic_projection).png? And you're asking why Nagorno-Karabakh isn't in a lighter colour, like how the contested areas of Georgia are on this map: File:Georgia (orthographic projection with inset).svg? The place you'll need to address the issue is at Talk:Azerbaijan. Please do note, this exact topic apparently comes up a lot, there are three different posts about it just on the current page, and undoubtedly more on that Talk page's archive. I would strongly suggest that you:

• First read that Talk page and any mentions of the map in its archives; if you come storming in without having read past discussions, people will be less supportive because they don't want to repeat the same argument over and over again.
• Secondly, remain calm and civil at all times, even if not everyone is. Any neutral editors brought in to assist in debates are going to look poorly on whichever side of an argument acts uncivil, so avoid any personal attacks, accusations, etc. and make sure your arguments are based on Wikipedia policy.
• If you genuinely feel, after looking into the history of the map discussion, that people aren't being neutral enough, you can check in with WP:WikiProject Maps, where you can talk to other editors who specialise in maps overall, and may have perspective on standardising issues like contested territories.

Hope this helps, and I emphasise again that you want to read all the former discussions about maps in the archives of Talk:Azerbaijan. Being the fourth person on the page to show up and loudly demand a change, with no context, no formal Wikipedia-procedures argument, etc is not going to get anyone anywhere. Feel free to check in back here if you have further questions. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:16, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, worth looking at the maps we already have - at [6]. Rich Farmbrough, 02:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC).

Yep, I expect he's suggesting that this one be used as the primary image at Azerbaijan: File:Azerbaijan with Nagorno Karabakh region.svg. That said, there should be consensus on the Talk page first. I really doubt that he could just change the image without it being quickly reverted, so best to talk it out first. MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm simply wondering how to upload images and place them im a sidebar on the right-hand side.

Thanks!

Renaissancefan (talk) 00:12, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Renaissancefan and welcome to the Teahouse! There are two options for uploading files; you can decide which works best. If the image is being used under fair use guidelines, then you must use the File Upload Wizard. (Sorry for the legalese in the fair use guidelines page, the only way I can sum it up is already done so in the "page in a nutshell" section) If you own the image, you can upload it either through the file upload wizard or to The Wikimedia Commons, a database of freely usable media files to which anyone can contribute; The Wikipedia of Media if you will. Once you have uploaded the image, you go to the page you want to add it to, and click the little picture icon in the edit wizard, and follow the template there. Again, I apologize for the lengthy response, but file upload is one of our more cumbersome processes. Go Phightins! 01:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Renaissancefan! The sidebar is called an "infobox" (see WP:Infobox), and there are hundreds of them for all kinds of topics. A good way to find out which one you can use for your article would be to find a similar figure and simply copy their infobox to your article, and fill in your own details. For example, if you're writing the biography of a physicist, find another physicist's biography and see what infobox that article used, and copy it to yours. Most infoboxes have a line where you can enter a photo to illustrate the box, but make sure you observe how the coding is done so it'll display right. Just taking a close look at "how the other articles get it right" is one of the best ways for a lot of things here! MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:19, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much to both of you! I will give it a go. *fingers crossed* 184.69.5.66 (talk) 21:06, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I do not mean to seem unfriendly! Currently Kinu deleted the two mentioned articles. In case or "Verge Game Studio" I can understand because of the speedy deletion and I read and understood his arguments, but I dont think that the article "MaK(Verge Game Studio)" meets with the argumentation! Both articles were under constuction and on Mak was a mark that I have seven days to edit more details. About the advertisement: I tried to make the two sides objective, so I generally took the two sides Mojang and Minecraft as templates and inserted information i could find over the company and the game. I also got the affirmation from Verge Game Studio that they would increase the information by quality and quantity.

If you recognize my argumentation why this sides didn't need to be deleted, is there a way to restore them of do a have to make them in my sandbox first?

thanks

P.S: New account, my old one "Bot91" also got deleted :(Bau912 (talk) 12:08, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Bau912, and welcome to the teahouse! Hope you enjoy your stay here in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia anyone can edit! Concerning your deleted material, you might wish to consider sending the admin who deleted your work a request to have it back so you can better work on it. Your efforts are much appreciated and once again, welcome to wikipedia! Bonkers The Clown (talk) 12:59, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello again Bau912. Bonkers suggestion is excellent! Just some additional help. The administrator that deleted the article Verge Game Studio is User:Kinu and he can be reached at his user talk page (click the "talk" link when viewing his user name). When you approach him, you'll want to ask him if he can convert the deleted article to a draft article in your "user space". The "user space" is any page which is prefixed by your user name (so User:Bau912/sandbox could be the name of a "sandbox" or draft space within your user space). If you cannot reach Kinu in a timely manner, you can also make a request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion where another administrator can respond to your request. The special "Wikipedia word" we use for these requests is called "userfying" (as in "moved to my user space".) The advantage of a "userfied" article is that it can be developed into a proper article at your own pace, and you are generally given more leeway in working on the article and bringing it up to standard before it is "published" in the main article space. You also have the option of using the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process, which is an optional process for new users (or even experienced users) to get help and feedback as they create new articles. Does any of this help? --Jayron32 13:21, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks guys for the help, but i simply made new articles as user pages and marked them for submission. In the end the easiest way to create an acceptable article :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bau912 (talk • contribs) 12:03, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

What purpose has the option of adding Categorie: ... exactly?Bot91 (talk) 01:52, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Bot91. Welcome to Wikipedia. Glad you came here to ask your questions. The short answer is: Indexing...Categorizing makes finding information you may be searching for much easier. For example you may be wanting to find out about a bridge you crossed on your last trip to Indiana, but all you remember is that it was in Indiana. You could go to Category:Bridges in Indiana and there they all are. Hope that clears the reason for categories.Gtwfan52 (talk) 02:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Bot91. The purpose of Wikipedia categories is to allow people to find other articles that are similar. It is a way of creating an index of articles by topic. So, for example, George Washington is categorized in many categories, both "United States Army generals" and "United States Presidents". I can find other people who are also United States Army Generals by using Category:United States Army generals, for example. It is a very useful system for organizing articles. See Wikipedia:FAQ/Categorization for answers to some questions you may have about categories, including the one you just asked. --Jayron32 02:25, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello! Categories, along with lists and navigation templates, are different methods of grouping articles. All three methods serve as navigation aids on Wikipedia. The FAQ that Jayron32 mentioned is a great starting point. For a more detailed explanation of the advantages and disadvantages of using categories, see Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#Categories. Cheers,--xanchester (t) 02:55, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

This section was deleted by Bau912, which is (I believe) the new user name for Bot91. Unless I misunderstand how the Teahouse works, a user shouldn't delete a question with the answers which it has received. There should be time for other readers to see the question and answers (& if necessary to amplify the answers). The question and answers will be archived in a few days, but ought not to be deleted before then. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:17, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks guys, solved! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bau912 (talk • contribs) 12:04, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

How can I update a reduced image with a new file type? Currently the two types are not compatible.

Daniel Kivari (talk) 18:57, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, and welcome to the teahouse! I'm not certain, but I'm guessing you're trying to upload an image that's in a file format that WP doesn't support, and you've figured out that just renaming the file doesn't help. If I'm correct so far, try loading the file into any application that will let you view the image and then try "Save As" and select a new filetype there. If that doesn't work, let us know the file type you're working with and someone else here might be able to help. GaramondLethe 19:28, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome! Actually, the issue is that the nature of the file as a logo does not warrant the use of a jpg file. I have converted it successfully to a png file, but Wikipedia will not upload the file, because of the conflict in the extensions. [File:Kenner Collegiate Vocational Institute Logo (blue).jpg] --Daniel Kivari (talk) 19:37, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

• A solution is to simply re-upload the (new) file by slightly modifying the title of it, because files don't overwrite on Wikipedia. It the file you're attempting to upload is of superior quality compared to File:Kenner Collegiate Vocational Institute Logo (blue).jpg, after uploading the new file, you can also request deletion of the inferior-quality file at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Hope this helps out! Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

This may sound like a daft question.But genuinely what is the purpose of citation and/or footnotes within a Wikipedia article. How important is it and does it break any rules when not used. Thanks.--Jeffasiedu (talk) 22:36, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello Jeffasiedu, and welcome to the TeaHouse. Both the existence and content of every wikipedia article is directly dependent on the sources that underpin it, whether those sources are references or footnotes. Articles without sources are liable to get deleted with little or no notice. Sections of articles and individual claims without sources are liable to be trimmed. So to answer your question, the footnotes are vitally important. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

As Stuart said, footnotes are what make Wikipedia work! Otherwise, anything could be added -- which would basically make Wikipedia useless as a research source -- as you wouldn't not what was true and what wasn't. You may want to take a look at this page for a bit more policy-ish text on "Verifiability", if reading that kind of stuff floats your boat. Theopolisme _Boo! 00:16, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

• For additional information, see also Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:52, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I've already read the Wikipedia page which details it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CHU) but where do I post or send my request?

Thanks.

Moffittsharmeka (talk) 02:49, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Can you tell us more about why you are seeking a renaming? That way I can direct you to the right people to get your request done! Thanks, gwickwire | Leave a message 03:12, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I've already resolved the issue but thanks anyway. Moffittsharmeka (talk) 03:30, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

What is the code to do this? [url] doesn't achieve it. StuZealand (talk) 01:29, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey Stu, and welcome to the Teahouse! The first step will be to check the file's permissions. I would be very happy to do this for you if you just provide a link, using the [ ] brackets, to the file. If the permissions check out, me or another editor can help you upload it to Wikipedia (or if appropriate, Wikimedia Commons), and add it to the article. Thanks for the question, and feel free to ask if I haven't been clear! gwickwire | Leave a message 01:34, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

How do I delete an uploaded image (jpeg) file? It was uploaded using the Upload Wizard. Where does it reside? How is this different from Wikimedia Commons? Plarkin50 (talk) 00:49, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey Plarkin, and welcome! Could you please provide a link to the image if you have one? Or if you don't have a link, could you provide me the title of the image? Also, why exactly do you need to delete it (wrong permission, unused, etc)? If you give me the name you used when uploading it, I can go check it out for you. Thanks! gwickwire | Leave a message 01:36, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, I'm User:helendixon1960 I have a question about permission on uploading a picture. I got the image off Google and I uploaded it but it says that I need permission so they image would get through. I tried to e-mail the official permission e-mail address but it wouldn't go through.

Can someone show me the steps how to get permission or should I re-upload the image?

Thanks! - 33:35 November 2, 2012 (UTC)

Welcome Helen! Most pictures you find on Google aren't going to be able to be used here on Wikipedia. Check out Wikimedia Commons if you're looking for a picture to add to an article. Go Phightins! 00:36, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Locator maps already exist but I do not know how to add them in the articles:

- Cyprus–Sweden relations - Australia-Cyprus relationsIsrArmen (talk) 19:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello IsrArmen, can you give us links to the specific maps you'd like to include? MatthewVanitas (talk) 19:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

IsrArmen, I've fixed Cyprus-Sweden, you were almost right but the names of the two countries needed to be the other way round. There is a locator map for Australia-Cyprus but there is no article, currently it is a redirect to Foreign relations of Australia. If you expand it into an article then you need to use the code

{{Infobox bilateral relations | Australia - Cyprus | Australia | Cyprus | filetype=svg }}. Hope this helps. NtheP (talk) 19:52, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

 Done: for the Cyprus–Sweden relations article. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot guys for your help!!! I really appreciate that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 21:21, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I have erroneously re-named a waterway map it will not let me rectify this. If I try to edit the map I get redirected to a template M.F. W-Venables (talk) 15:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I have fixed it for you. Please check if that's what you wanted to do. The map was transcluded to the article from a template. You can edit the template here:Template:River Arun map. --Anbu121 (talk me) 15:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello,

I have tried to create text for Peerless Guitars and also listed them under 'guitar brands' 3 times now, but the editorial does not remain. I believe that I am following instructions properly, but am unsure if the text is being removed by Wikipedia for some reason? 109.152.188.244 (talk) 12:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia and the teahouse! Could you add a link to or specify precisely which the article you edited? I cannot really find your edit and thus cannot be more specific in my help. Some reasons Wikipedia removes information: blatant vandalism, not notable information, copyright violations or unreferenced information (quite rare to remove this, but it is still part of our content policy). Does your edit fall under any of these category? --Lionratz (talk) 13:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Since joining I've been mostly tidying up the content in list of uranium mines, especially the content of the various tables etc.

Since there is aa fair bit of this to do and I only get a shortish run at it each time, is it legitimate to create a copy of the page in my sandbox and work on it there? And if so is there an approved way to do that, other than copying and pasting the content from the edit page?

Or should I just keep doing incremental amendments on the live article?

Thanks in advance. Myall blues (talk) 05:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Myall blues, welcome to Wikipedia and the teahouse! One problem I would foresee about copying the entire page and working in your own sandbox is the possibility that someone will make an edit before you. The article you are working on will then be an outdated one, and when you paste it back, editors might get angry because their edits are undone for no apparent reason. My suggestion will be to add the under construction template to inform other editors that you are working (and making large changes) on it. I don't recall any rules prohibiting you from copying and pasting from edit pages, so that should not be a problem either. Therefore, you can actually do it in the two ways you mentioned. Just that I would recommend doing the incremental approach way so that you can be sure that you are editing the latest and most updated version of the article. Good luck in your editing!--Lionratz (talk) 06:37, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Lionratz - sincere thanks for the prompt response. Myall blues (talk) 08:52, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Happy editing!--Lionratz (talk) 12:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Myall blues, there's a slogan "Wikipedia has no deadline" that really applies here. Linoratz has some good suggestions, though I would note that "under construction" is more used for things like "I'm right this minute making edits, so don't cause an edit conflict in the next 10 minutes." Possibly a yet better tag would be Template:Expand list. Given that what you're making is a list, so long as folks don't mistakenly assume it's "complete" it's not doing any harm to have a partial list. There are a few circumstances under which too-short of an article could be unproductive (like an article about a murderer where the article is too short to even say what he was arrested for), but lists are very often incomplete by their nature, so I'd just make one single article, tag it as "expand list", and work on it at your leisure on the articlespace. MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:07, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I apologize if this is not the correct way to break into this page for a question but after many attempts to start a new section I finally gave up with what looks to be the intended way. The button at the top of the screen gives me a blank box overtop other text boxes and there is no new section tab at the top of the page either. Many of the text boxes overlap and many are unreadable due to overlapping??? The whole thing wreaks of a new browser language mine doesn't support or verse vica. /rant off:)

I am attempting to keep text that elaborates photo content but I cannot figure out how sections are kept together. I have used many new line break insertions in the section finale but I know this cannot be the correct way to do it See here for what I have done.There must be a better way but despite researching WP:MoS stuff I have resorted to calling for help. Thanks in advance. 174.118.142.187 (talk) 20:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Seems User:Hertz1888 solved the problem for me. It appears WP formatting has a small bug in it that I have encountered before. Sections of text are not formatted into its final version until the editor leaves the article and then returns. The helping editor removed all the extra
chars from the end of the section and now it formatted just fine after I returned. No it wasn't a local cache thing as my latest edits were present in the text, after the save, just the formatting of the following section header wasn't appropriate. Thanks. 174.118.142.187 (talk) 20:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)