Wikipedia:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Contents

Most recent archives
908, 909, 910, 911, 912, 913, 914, 915, 916, 917, 918, 919, 920, 921, 922, 923, 924, 925, 926, 927

Follow-up to How to contribute in a debate?[edit]

Hello,

This article that I submitted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salim_Sfeir is subject for deletion. They asked me for more sources in 2 sections and I provided several citations to reliable sources, the template in one section was removed. But in the career section, the template saying that there are no sources is still there. They did not remove it even thought I included new sources. Could you kindly advise on what I should do?

Also, There are no more comments on why the article is still subject for deletion. And now the article is "relisted". Could you kindly advise on what I should do next? Should I wait or is there anything I should improve in the article? Best regards, JoanneNaoum (talk) 09:35, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

JoanneNaoum, you can post to the article's talk page asking if the deletion debate ends up decided as "delete" whether the article can be placed in your userspace, where you can continue to work on it at your leisure. Creating an article is very difficult for a brand-new editor with no other editing experience, and there's a lot of reading you'll need to do.
You can also post to the deletion discussion; there's a link to it in the notice box at the top of the article. I would suggest you choose your three BEST sources -- nonaffiliated sources that are of unimpeachable reliability and provide significant coverage, not just a short mention -- and point those sources out to the other editors in the deletion discussion. The only way an article will survive deletion is to prove notability, which again is not easy for a brand-new editor to do. Sheer numbers of sources won't do it. There have to be at minimum three that are BOTH reliable and significant.
If you are a family member or representative of Mr. Sfeir, you need to let us know. There are special difficulties when someone close to an article subject creates that article. You can read about them at WP:COI. It's not forbidden that someone close to the article subject create the article, but it is important to disclose any relationship. --valereee (talk) 10:04, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the explanation valereee. I will do that JoanneNaoum (talk) 10:09, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

I am the "they" who added a citations needed tag for a section, and have now moved it to a different section. You can comment at the AfD; will help if you identify yourself as the creator, and which of the refs are paramount in establishing notability. "Relisted" means that the deletion discussion has been extended because there were not enough comments to date. As valereee pointed out, an option to ask for is that the article be moved to Draft space, allowing time to work on it before submitting to Articles for Creation. David notMD (talk) 21:47, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you David David notMDfor the clarifications. yes I am the creator of the article. I noticed that it was moved to another section. JoanneNaoum (talk) 08:33, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Requesting unprotection[edit]

Hello, I recently came across this article Cricket World Cup and found that it has been move protected for almost eight years now. That seems unnecessary and it looks like it is long overdue for unprotection as there doesn't seem to be any current issue for which protection is currently in place. I've seen the guidelines and the correct protocol is to ask the protecting admin first, but there have been multiple admins who have protected and unprotected it over the years. I would therefore like to know the correct procedure for requesting unprotection in this case. TheGeneralUser (talk) 05:51, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

  • @TheGeneralUser: I suggest asking the admin who most recently added or amended the move protection. If they're inactive you can make a request at WP:RFUP. Neiltonks (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
(ec) Looking at the protection log, it looks like the first time indefinite move protection was applied was by Nev1 back in 2011, after a short move war between KS700 and AshwiniKalantri (KS700 has been blocked since 2012, and AK hasn't edited since 2011). All protection changes after that have only added semiprotection for short periods. You could ask this at Nev1's talkpage, otherwise the correct place is at WP:RFPP. rchard2scout (talk) 12:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. TheGeneralUser (talk) 04:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Archiving[edit]

I set up my talk page for archiving by a bot. However, I did not archive the post Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!. Is there a reason behind this? Can you fix this for me? Mstrojny (talk) 10:04, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Mstrojny. I think archive bots intentionally leave welcome message templates unarchived, so that their helpful contents are always available. (We had a template added to a Teahouse post here some weeks ago which stubbornly refused to be archived, and just stayed at the top of the page for ages. I simply edited the page, copied and cut out the text from here, then pasted it into the relevant archive. I think this is the practical way to deal with it (or simply delete it altogether) Unfortunately I'm not sufficiently experienced with archival settings to know if there's actually a setting which ensures that welcome template messages are included in archive actions. I suspect PrimeHunter may be able to shed more light on this, if they're around. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:19, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@Mstrojny: I think it's because there is no standard time stamp in the section so the bot does not know whether it's old enough to allow archiving. It says "15:10, Sunday, January 6, 2019 (UTC)". A time stamp from a signature would have said "15:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC)". You can try changing it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes and PrimeHunter: In your opinion, Is it better to keep that post as is or try to archive it? Mstrojny (talk) 18:44, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes and PrimeHunter: Also, the bot archived my welcome message. There could be some exceptions. Mstrojny (talk) 18:49, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@Mstrojny: It's absolutely up to you. Delete it; keep it; archive it. I can't remember what I did with my three sets when I repeatedly tried to work my way through WP:TWA. It really wouldn't matter to anyone if you deleted it. So you choose; it's not a big issue either way, or with the welcome message (that I appear to have sent you!) I doubt you'll need those links again. Other editors delete warning notices they receive - they are allowed to do that. The fact that someone received a particular warning/welcome/automated message is always gong to be there in the edit history of their talk page if someone really wanted to look for it. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:55, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I would try to archive The Wikipedia Adventure section but it's up to you, e.g. if you want to use the links later without going to the archive first. Nick Moyes was guessing that it was kept because it was a welcome. I don't think welcome messages are treated differently from other posts. The archived welcome had a standard time stamp from a signature. The Wikipedia Adventure posts the time in another way using {{Currentdate}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:58, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

what are the green plus numbers on your contributions[edit]

Hi, I've started edited and hopefully will soon produce some new, historic pages as well. Can you tell me what the green figures are when I look at my contributions so far please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Almond 1968 (talkcontribs) 16:57, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@David Almond 1968: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It it the number of bytes added to the page. It roughly corresponds to the number of letters/characters, but not exactly. If the number is red, it refers to the number of bytes taken away. 331dot (talk) 16:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Ah - thank you--David Almond 1968 (talk) 17:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Can I name a character of a show in the cast if I do not know yet who has played them[edit]

Can I name a character in the cast section of any show, if right now I don't know who is the person who played that character. This way, the name of the actor/actress can later be added. King Armaan 17 (talk) 17:07, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@King Armaan 17: Welcome to the Teahouse, your majesty. I'd say, 'yes,' so long as there are sources that show that the character's name does actually play a part in the programme. It's important not to put anything into an article that you happen to know, if you haven't got that information from somewhere else - a programme listing, for example. But we do seem to allow a lot of leeway with TV programmes which (in my personal view) tend to be far, far too long and far too detailed, yet all based off editors' experiences of watching the programme, rather than more succinct content based on articles about those programme (film and TV reviews, etc). Hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:15, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. That is exactly why I said that, since in a TV programme new characters get introduced, and therefore it is no harm if their names are added, since the actor/actress who played them can be later added. King Armaan 17 (talk) 08:09, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

@King Armaan 17: As per WP:TVCAST not every character deserves to be listed as per notability. So unless you don't have a reliable source to add a character without cast name or cast name without character name you can't add it. I would suggest you to read MOS:TV carefully as your edits on Chandragupta Maurya (2018 TV series) are not according to the guidelines, appropriate way to split the cast listing by "Main" and "Recurring" cast or characters and classification right now of cast section is a classic example of WP:OTHERSTUFF which violates WP:TVCAST. Sid95Q (talk) 15:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Can you help me with posting photos?[edit]

Hi,

My name is Rick Bella and I am a board member for the Oregon Mandolin Orchestra (http://oregonmandolinorchestra.org), a nonprofit, community-based orchestra in Portland, Ore.

I redit the orchestra's entire Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Mandolin_Orchestra) on March 19 to reflect major changes in the organization since the first version of the page went up years ago. I returned on March 20 and posted three photos to the page -- and ran into a problem.

One photo came from Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gibson-mandolin-orchestra.jpg

The other two photos were from a photographer in Portland, Ore., whom the Oregon Mandolin Orchestra hired in December 2017 to provide photos for the orchestra's unrestricted use. Both of those photos were removed from Wikimedia Commons because of perceived copyright violations.

I spoke yesterday to the photographer who was puzzled at Wikipedia's reaction and reaffirmed to me verbally that the photos were for use any way the orchestra sees fit -- including entering them on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons.

What is the proper channel for using these photos? One is of the orchestra's new executive director; the other is a group photo of the orchestra.

Thank you!

Oremandos (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2019 (UTC) Oremandos (Rick Bella)

Hello @Oremandos:, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please make sure to read and follow the COI-related advice on your user talkpage. Some promotional parts of your recent edits are not suitable for an encyclopedia, and you should suggest new content or changes on the article talkpage instead. Regarding your original question: you'll find detailed information about verifying a free license via mail at Commons:Commons:OTRS. Such a verification should be sent by the copyright owner (or an authorized representative) and must include a completely free license permission without restrictions. You'll find more details and a link to example emails in the linked page. But please feel free to ask here if you have additional questions (Commons also has a Commons-specific help desk at Commons:Commons:Help desk). Hope this helps. GermanJoe (talk) 17:40, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi Oremandos Commons and Wikipedia are both part of the Wikimedia Foundation family, but they are separate and distinct parts; so, if you upload a file to Commons which is subsequently deleted, you will need to sort things out there. There's quite a lot of similarities in policies and guidelines between the two projects and a number of editors do edit both; however, there's not much that anyone can do here at the Teahouse except point you in the right direction. The files were deleted by a Commons administrator named Jcb; you can ask about the deletions at c:User talk:Jcb is you like. Whether the file is restored ultimately depends upon whether you can establish it meets c:COM:L.
One thing to remember about a work for hire is that there's not always an official/complete copyright transfer agreement. The creator may in some cases retain some control over their work, which means their WP:CONSENT is also going to be needed for the file to be uploaded to Commons. The creator may have told you verbally "Sure, go ahead and use the file on Wikipedia or any other website as you like", but this is not really sufficient for Wikipedia/Commons. First, there's no way to verify a verbal agreement such as this; while you may feel that taking you at your word should be good enough, it's not for Wikipedia/Commons. This doesn't mean nobody believes you; it just means a more rigorous form of verification is required to protect not only the Wikimedia Foundation, but also the rights of the original copyright holder. Another problem is that "Wikipedia only" of "individual specific" types of permission are not sufficient for Wikipedia/Commons. Basically, a person who uploads a file to Commons is agreeing in an advance to allow anyone anywhere in the world to down load the file at anytime for any purpose (including derivative use and commercial use) with only some very minor restrictions, such as requiring attribution, being placed on any subsequent use. Moreover, once a file has been released under such a license, it cannot be cancelled or taken back after the fact. This is another reason why Wikipedia/Commons is so strict when it comes to licensing. It doesn't mean mistakes are never made; it just means that lots of effort is being made to minimize mistakes from happening as much as possible.
Finally, just for reference, when a file is uploaded to Commons under a free license like Creative Commons, there is no transfer of copyright ownership taking place. The original creator of the work still retains copyright ownership over it; they are just agreeing to freely release (via Commons) a particular version of the work to make it easier for others to use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:41, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

no review needed[edit]

I just today (March 22nd) created an article which I really felt is needed ----- VOC Exempt solvents ------ However, in the past when I have created an article it has said "pending review" or similar. This article is a work in progress and I am adding references and inline cites. But it has been published straight away. I am not complaining but I think it should at least have some review/input by a senior editor even though I am an expert on the subject in my own right. Why did the system allow me to create the article without review when all previous article have said "pending review?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRALISTAIR (talkcontribs) 17:38, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

It is the difference between a draft and a live article. If you want it to be a draft instead, follow the instructions at WP:MOVE, tag the old one for deletion under the cross-namespace redirect rule, and add {{submit}} when you are done. -A lainsane (Channel 2) 18:55, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
@GRALISTAIR: Or I can 'draftify' it for you with one click of a button, so you can carry on working on it until you're happy with it. It's up to you. Let us know. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:59, 22 March 2019 (UTC)


@Nick Moyes - happy to leave it as it is and I will keep improving it and hopefully one or two others will add to it also - thanks

Unprotecting a protected page[edit]

"Bettiah",is a protected page.there is no way to unprotect this page to edit it to add content or fix a typo.plz help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.57.177.253 (talk) 18:18, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. In the desktop version of the site you can click the "View source" tab and then "Submit an edit request". I see you are in the mobile version. It's harder there but you could start by clicking "Desktop" at the bottom of the article, then "View source" and "Submit an edit request". PrimeHunter (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Here's the link Bettiah for interested editors. I found one typo and fixed it, but there are some grammar and punctuation issues that can be improved. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:27, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Edit warring[edit]

I've made edits to a living person and someone (I suspect the person or someone close to him) his username is Resnjari- keeps undoing the changes and listing a lot of unreferenced or simply inaccurate details. Im correcting those with referenced, substantiated facts.

How can I get them to stop or have someone review the issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomasrussell (talkcontribs) 19:55, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Start with trying to solve your disagreement by discussing on the talkpage, Talk:John Alite. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
The article has HUGE BLP-problems, btw. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:20, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

How can i change my username[edit]

Please I want to change my username how can I do that please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Celebwriter534555 (talkcontribs) 19:55, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Changing username. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:22, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Off-topic. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:05, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Julian Assange[edit]

Can someone, please, notify Julian Assange that there are federal elections in Australia in May this year. He should be nominated as an independent candidate in the electorate where he comes from. He will win a seat in the Federal Parliament for sure and certain - and will enjoy parliamentary privilege so he can walk out freely from the self-imposed asylum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.202.184 (talk) 01:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Company jump and HomeAdvisor they took down my name and said they did work for me online to help my business grow[edit]

Jim has billed me for a turnout thousand dollars $1,200 I'm having did a thing for me I never signed nothing to join them they statement they have any made a web page for me I don't think they have been haven't heard nothing I haven't seen nothing and HomeAdvisor has billed me thousand dollars for two for me working for my have not ever worked for him never had no jobs, and they billed me for no work at all keep sending me Bill I've been scammed my cards gone through ivory paid for I don't know how many sites on Google I have not even I'm not on him no more and I never got my year — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:387:A:3:0:0:0:7F (talk) 04:22, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

This sounds like a matter that you should report to your local police, or consumer protection organization. I'm not sure how the volunteers at Wikipedia can help - this page is for questions about how to edit Wikipedia articles. --Gronk Oz (talk) 05:24, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Writing an article about a subject who has adopted a performance name[edit]

Hi, I am currently writing an article about a subject who has adopted a professional/performance name. Up until around 2015/2016, the person used their full legal name (e.g. Alice). Then, around 2017, they started using a radically different performance name (e.g. Barbara). In the article, I mention some events before 2017 (e.g. birth) and some events afterwards. Also, other articles on Wikipedia make reference to both the person's full legal name (Alice) and their stage name (Barbara) depending on if the subject of the article is pre-2017 or post-2017. I was wondering what standards there are for this situation, and if I should change the other articles to comply with the standard (i.e., change Alice to Barbara or vice versa). Thanks! Hickland (talk) 05:00, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Hickland and welcome to the Teahouse. There is a detailed description of how to handle such situations at MOS:LEGALNAME. If you still have any questions after reading it, please come back again and ask. --Gronk Oz (talk) 05:27, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Hickland. The birth name or legal name should be mentioned in the first sentence of the article, along with the stage name. Throughout the rest of the article, the stage surname should be used to describe the person, since that is the name associated with their notability. Take a look at John Wayne and Cary Grant for examples. Both are consistently called "Wayne" and "Grant" throughout their biographies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:43, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick replies, Cullen328 and Gronk Oz! I was also wondering about editing other articles. In a 2014 song, the person in question is officially listed in songwriting credits as "Kayla Rae Bonnici" (their legal name), but ever since they adopted a stage name, newly released songs use the person's stage name when listing songwriting credits. Should I update the article about the 2014 song to the person's stage name or should I leave it as is? Hickland (talk) 05:59, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello again, Hickland. Since the Bonnici name is in the official credits for the song, leave it as it is. Once your draft is accepted into the main space of the encyclopedia, you can create a wikilink using the "piped link" function, so that clicking that link leads to the article titled with the current stage name. See WP:PIPE for details. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:10, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks for all the help! Hickland (talk) 06:13, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Listing articles which have two categories[edit]

I'm sure this should be really obvious, but I can't see it ... would somebody be so kind as to point me in the right direction? How can I find articles which have two categories? For example, today I want to find stubs in the area of New England (New South Wales). I can look up the list of towns in category:Towns in New England (New South Wales), or I can look up stubs at the state level at Category:New South Wales geography stubs. What I want is the intersection of those two lists, so I can see stubs in that region. Thoughts, please? --Gronk Oz (talk) 05:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Gronk Oz Your question rang a bell with me, and luckily I maintain a list of useful tools on my userpage which I've encountered in the past. There I have listed https://petscan.wmflabs.org which I think might suit your purpose. It yielded 23 results see here). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
@Gronk Oz: You can also use incategory: twice in our search box: incategory:"Towns in New England (New South Wales)" incategory:"New South Wales geography stubs". PrimeHunter (talk) 10:35, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Nick Moyes and PrimeHunter - Thank you! Smile.gif Those are going straight into my personal Cheat Notes.--Gronk Oz (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
You're welcome! I wasn't aware myself that one can combine two category searches together on-wiki. So much still to learn here - so little time ...! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:50, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Referencing text followed by parenthetical statement that also needs referencing?[edit]

Hi, I'm a little confused about how to reference text when it's followed by a parenthetical statement that also needs referencing. Could you please advise on which of the following is correct?

Text[ref1] (parenthetical text).[ref2]
Text[ref1] (parenthetical text[ref2]).
Text (parenthetical text[ref2]).[ref1]
Text (parenthetical text).[ref1][ref2]

Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.70.219.209 (talk) 05:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

The last one. Less clutter putting them together. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 06:19, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Bots[edit]

Hi, I am a bit confused on the usage of bots on Wikipedia. How to people create and use them? Is it an administrator tool or something? Even after reading the Wikipedia bot policy, I still don't know what kind of editors operate bots and how they create them. Catinthedogs (talk) 07:28, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Catinthedogs. You do not need to be an administrator to create a bot. You need to have adequate programming skills and enough knowledge of Wikipedia to identify a recurring problem that can be resolved through use of a bot. Your bot needs to be thoroughly tested and approved. Read Help:Creating a bot and Wikipedia:Bots which is a bit broader than the formal policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Rename[edit]

Hi, Today, I left a username change request for me on Wikipedia:Changing username/Simple. 2 minutes later, I got a response from Cyberbot I, saying that there were "no problems found". There was no other message there, and I have not been renamed. What does this mean? Catinthedogs (talk) 10:50, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Catinthedogs That simply means that an automated system has analyzed your username choice and found no issues with it. A human will actually need to rename you. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Kashmir Observer[edit]

Why this page is not being accepted or created as it's one of the well known and oldest newspaper in Jammu and Kashmir

https://kashmirobserver.net/about-us — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sufi519 (talkcontribs)

Hello, Sufi519. Welcome. I am not an adminstrator, so cannot see the deleted articles, but it appears that you have made three rather bad attempts in very quick succession at creating an article about this newspaper. And each time it was pointed out to you on your talk page that you had done so in an an inappropriate, and clearly promotional manner, possibly with a Conflict of Interest. As a result of you failing to listen to the advice you received - and repeatedly recreating it - a decision was then made by administrators to block any further attempt at you or anyone else creating a page under this title without admin approval. So, I am afraid, you have done that newspaper a disservice.
It will now require an administrator to approve any further attempt at creating this page. So, any editor now wishing to do so, would have to prepare a draft article which clearly demonstrated (in a neutral and encyclopaedic tone, and based on Reliable Sources) how the Kashmir Observer meets our Notability criteria, and to do this via the Articles for Creation process. I suspect that if you hadn't tried so relentlessly, this task would not now have become so difficult for everyone else. If you are being paid to edit any article here, you have already been advised (see here) of your obligations to declare them before attempting to edit them again. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:20, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
Sufi519, please read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kashmir Observer which provides more information. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:18, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Editing[edit]

How can you get the biggest fans? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bestman04 (talkcontribs) 12:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Bestman04, welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you haven't given us enough information to properly understand your question. Do you want to edit The Biggest Fan, Biggest Fan, or Biggest Fan (Chris Brown song) - or something else? None of those pages are protected in a way that would stop you, as a very new user with only 8 edits and 5 days here, from editing them. Other pages here do have what we call "semi-protection" so until you reach that very low editing bar (known as Auto-confirmed) you'd be unable to modify them (Just look for a padlock icon in the upper top right of an article to see if it has any form of protection.
None of those linked above do. So, the more you can help us understand what it that you want to achieve, the more we can help you. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 13:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Need help with page Sam Shockley ( Alcatraz) .[edit]

Need help with page Sam Shockley ( Alcatraz) . I am new here. I have a lot of documents from NARA Archive and others, but I think Wikipeadia will not accept my writing (?) I there someone who can help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda texel (talkcontribs) 13:05, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello! These may help: Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Help:Referencing for beginners. And remember not to copypaste from your sources, use your own words. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:49, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

I need Coaching! Some one who can help me and tell me wat I did wrong with this page and help me to get along. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linda texel (talkcontribs) 15:03, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Linda texel. When you add significant new content to a Wikipedia article, you have to provide a reference to a reliable source that verifies what you add. You mention documents from the "NARA archive" which I assume is the National Archives and Records Administration. Whether or not these documents are acceptable as reliable sources depends on whether they were published, or are unpublished government memos. For interested editors, the article is Sam Shockley who was executed for his role in a bloody escape attempt from Alcatraz prison in 1946, called the Battle of Alcatraz. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:47, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Administrators[edit]

Hi, Does someone need to be extended confirmed to become an administrator? Note that I am not interested in becoming an administrator right now, but I think that it is good for me to know, if I want to become one sometime. Catinthedogs (talk) 14:37, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Well, theoretically, no: The English Wikipedia has no official requirements to become an administrator. Anyone can request adminship ("RFA") from the community, regardless of their Wikipedia experience. But yes, absolutely. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:44, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
@Catinthedogs: Welcome to the Teahouse. To be WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED an account simply has to be over 30 days old and have made 500 edits, which is actually a pretty small amount of commitment to the project if we are talking about someone eventually becoming an administrator. My expectation would be that it would take ten to twenty times that amount of numerical commitment before our broad community of editors felt anyone had even got near approaching a point of gaining sufficiently broad experience across all our key policies, guidelines and ways of working and dealing with issues to be granted the role of administrator. That's not said to put you off in any way, shape or form. I love the fact that you've thought about it and took the trouble to ask.
So now you have the next few years in which to come to grips with editing and how this utterly amazing multi-faceted website operates though volunteer collaboration. So, maybe three or four years time, after some pretty active contributing, the next 'optional' step to assess that readiness could be to put for an editor to put their name forward for an optional RfA poll - a helpful overview of an editor's strengths/weaknesses and likely chances of a full 7-day Request for Adminship being successful or not. Quite often, users who have got themselves noticed through their competent editing and understanding and application of policies may get approached by an existing admin and asked whether they'd consider becoming an administrator one day, and maybe get offered a few pointers of things to work on before standing. And then, if they do gain admin permissions, all they'll have become is glorified janitors in The Matrix, going round helping and mopping up the mess and problems that others in this virtual world have created! I'm not saying that admins are a dying breed, but Wikipedia has been losing more admins than it appoints in recent years. So it is great to see the next generation of editors looking ahead and wondering what's involved in the maintenance of this wonderful encyclopaedia. Good luck on your own journey here. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)    

Draft: MIT Vishswashanti Gurukul Declined[edit]

What shall I do to get it accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garimakand (talkcontribs) 14:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Garimakand. What you need to do to get your draft accepted is to find places where people who have no connection with the school have chosen to write about it at some length, and been published in reliable places. Wikipedia is basically not interested in anything said about the school, by its employees or associates. All the current references are either mere listings, or derived from the school's own press releass. Please read your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Correction[edit]

Deep raj singh not raichand — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.87.149.100 (talk) 17:49, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

It is not clear what you're asking. Can you please be more specific on what it is you need help with? Mstrojny (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
According to the article on actor Arjun Bijlani, he plays a character called "Deep Raichand/Deep Raj Singh" in the Indian TV series Ishq Mein Marjawan, which latter article however mentions only Raichand, not Raj Singh. The OP may be commenting on the text in the actor's article, or making an observation about the series' plot, about which I know nothing beyond what its article says. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 21:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

CHINEDU EKEH[edit]

Am chinedu from imo state am a filmmaker — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.190.30.194 (talk) 18:29, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Question[edit]

how to put my wikipedia page in my google search? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raptag (talkcontribs) 20:32, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

User pages are not included in Google searches because they are intended to be a short synopsis of your relationship with Wikipedia.... Please see WP:UP for some more information. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

How many weeks or Months  to approed my biography article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raptag (talkcontribs) 00:18, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

If by "my biography article" you mean your current User page, its content is completely inappropriate and likely to be deleted soon. The purpose of your User page is to describe your activities as a Wikipedia editor, not host your autobiography or promote your musical career: User pages are not articles and are not indexed by Google.
I will not pass comment on whether you are sufficiently Notable in Wikipedia's use of the term as to merit an article, but even if you are you should not be the one to write it, as autobiography is strongly disapproved of and almost impossible for anyone to write for themself according to the required standards of NPOV. You could make it a Draft article and see if anyone else is willing to copy edit it so as to be acceptable for Article mainspace. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia[edit]

Hello. I am trying to move my Sandbox article to Wikipedia so it is live. How can I do this? I am new to this so please help. Appreciate it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnye1975 (talkcontribs) 20:50, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Johnnye1975, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. Once you have made ten edits to Wikipedia (you have made 5 so far) you will have the ability to move articles. It will be possible for you to move User:Johnnye1975/sandbox to main space - but if you do so, it will probably be deleted, because it has no references at all. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and in order to have any sort of authority, it doesn't accept information just because you (or I, or any random person on the Internet) knows it and says it is so: we require that every single piece of information in an article be found in an already published source; and it is desirable, and in some cases obligatory, that the source of every piece of information be cited.
This is why creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and why I always recommend new users to spend a few weeks or months improving existing articles before they even try writing a new one.
My suggestion is that you leave your draft for a while and explore how to work with Wikipedia: when you're ready to pick it up again, have a look at your first article. I've put some helpful links on your user talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 10:48, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your help. I appreciate it. I am not sure what you meant by saying that my article has no references at all. I put a ton of references in there. Can you explain to me exactly what you mean? I am new to this and from what I am experiencing so far it is not easy for a beginner to understand all of this easily. Is there a way for someone to help me find references? Or do I have to do this myself? I linked a bunch of text up in the article as well as add numerous links for reference in the Reference section. Google links, Billboard links etc. I added some images to the article via upload through Wikimedia Commons and seems like I am getting a lot of deletion messages and I am not sure why. I had one album cover added on the article and from what I am understanding is that you can not put album covers on there? If that is the case then how do you reference an album if it is not on Wikipedia already? I'm really confused... I have done a lot of research into creating articles and it seems pretty straight forward but there is not really much I think I can keep adding to this article. If I feel it is complete at this point what do I do?Johnnye1975 (talk) 19:20, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
You'll find advice about referencing at Help:Referencing for beginners. Less importantly, the bold formatting should be removed from the section headings. Wikipedia will automatically format the headings to comply with the Manual of Style. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Mathieu de Montmorency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathieu_de_Montmorency[edit]

The Wikepedia page titled Mathieu de Montmorency has a portrait at the top of the oldest son of Madame Germaine de Stael, Auguste de Stael, which hangs in the Chateau of Coppet in Switzerland. It is NOT Mathieu de Montmorency and should be removed. Mathieu de Montmorency in his youth in Google Images looks like a younger version of the bottom picture. The two portraits currently on the page are quite obviously NOT the same person at all. I have no idea how to remove the incorrect portrait, but I am very familiar with Madame de Stael and her friends and family. Mathieu de Montmorency was a beloved friend of hers. Thanks.

Dgarratt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dgarratt (talkcontribs) 21:42, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

This appears to be a valid concern. The image in question is File:Mathieu de Montmorency - Young.jpg. This is identified as "Portrait of Mathieu de Montmorency (1767-1826)" by an unknown painter, and sourced to the dead link http://www.histoire-empire.org/persos/madame_de_stael.htm.
I found the original painting in "The Chateau of Coppet: Portrait Salon" http://www.swisscastles.ch/Vaud/Coppet/covisiteguidee6_e.html#cinq described as Madame de Staël`s child "Auguste de Staël ( 1790 – 1827) represented in front of the Castle of Coppet by François Gérard"
The official website of Coppet Castle describes the portraits in the portrait salon https://www.chateaudecoppet.com/le-salon-des-portraits . It mentions a portrait of Auguste de Stael (Auguste, oldest son of Madame Stael, portrait by Gerard [translated from French]). It also mentions a bust of her second husband, John Rocca, but makes no mention of a portrait of Mathieu de Montmorency.
I will remove the image from the article. Meters (talk) 05:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
I've raised the issue of renaming and correcting the file description on Commons. Meters (talk) 06:11, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Advice on settling a dispute[edit]

Hi, I'm not exactly new, but I'm in a dispute with another editor and I was wondering how I should go forward?

I recently rewrote the article Mirza Khizr Sultan due it being almost entirely unsourced and barely comprehensible. An editor, who had previously contributed to the page, quickly restored their personal content. This content went far beyond the scope of the article, and they later implied that they were basing it off their own family traditions. I asked them on their talk page if they could provide references, but they refused, instead intructing me to visit a museum in Turkey and a library in India to prove it for myself. They further mentioned that their "jewellery" is all the proof they need and that "the deep state" was trying to control information. They have since created two more closely related articles in the same vein, with the only reference between them not actually mentioning the topic.

They appear to have stopped responding in the talk page, so I'm not sure if going to Dispute resolution would work. Should I go to the Administrators' noticeboard, or is this too trivial for that? Or do you have any other suggestions? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thank you. Alivardi (talk) 01:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Alivardi - I don't think that the addition of unsourced information to an article is trivial. I would suggest that you review the dispute resolution policy (again, if you have reviewed it in the past) and follow one of the procedures, such as a report to the edit-warring noticeboard. Since the article is about India, I would suggest also reading the India-Pakistan case and consider the use of Arbitration Enforcement to deal with disruptive editing. I would suggest that you do something, rather than dismissing it as too trivial. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:22, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
User:Robert McClenon: Honesty, I was just worried that the incidents would be deemed too isolated for anyone to care too much. Anyways, I reported it and the Admins took the appropriate actions, so I'm happy. And thanks for the links, they were a huge help! Alivardi (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

The greatest person ever[edit]

Would you tell me about this content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijay dhanoutu (talkcontribs) 04:12, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

@Vijay dhanoutu:, if I'm understanding your request correctly, a good place to start may be some of the lists included at Person of the Year. Thank you, caknuck ° needs to be running more often 04:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Or there is Icons: The Greatest Person of the 20th Century, or Ireland's Greatest, or The Greatest American, or Time Person of the Year, or 100 Greatest Britons, or even The Greatest American Hero. @Vijay dhanoutu: can you please be a bit clearer about just which article you are asking about?--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

I need to work on my pain relief so I can heal others from pain. I need rest /resources /respect and I will share[edit]

I would like to request to visit the teahouses and the team — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8084:6022:CD00:DC0D:2BB:D869:237E (talk) 04:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

This is not possible. The 'Teahouse' exists only virtually, within a website on the internet; it has no physical existence: the 'team' comprises individuals working on the internet from their personal locations around the globe, who interact only via this website; probably no two of them has ever been, or will ever be, in the same place at the same time. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 05:29, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Also, the (virtual) Teahouse is part of the community of Wikipedia editors, and exists to help and encourage people in their work on editing Wikipedia, nothing else. I'm sorry for your pain, but this is not the right place for you to seek help on it. --ColinFine (talk) 10:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Ilaria Ramelli[edit]

Hello, anybody hanging around who is willing to take a look at this article? Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 07:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Lotje, Welcome to the Teahouse. My first impression is that this article is far too long and detailed, and reads like a bad CV. The lead should be cut down by 3/4 and there are far too many minor sycophantic additions which make me feel WP:TLDR. This is cruft and lazy referencing: Ramelli's books and essays are published, for instance, by Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, Brill, Harvard University Press, Mohr Siebeck, de Gruyter, Peeters, Brepols, Wiley-Blackwell, Routledge, T&T Clark, Wipf & Stock, Catholic University of America Press, SBL Press, InterVarsity, Gorgias, Polebridge, Cambridge Scholars, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Harrassowitz, Winter, Academia, Kohlhammer, Beauchesne, Latomus, Barkhuis, Groningen University Library, Universidad Complutense, Signifer, Paideia, Bompiani, Vita e Pensiero, Augustinianum, Marietti, Officina di Studi Medievali, Cittadella, Mimesis, Dell'Orso, ESD, LEV, etc. Some of her academic books and articles are collected, for example, in her Orcid profile, her Kudos profile, with indications of the publishers' websites, her EHS and ISNS profiles, in WorldCat, where an indication of her most widely held books also appears, in Google Scholar, JSTOR, and elsewhere.[66] We are all capable of identifying publishers from any selected books that are listed. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:58, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
How is it that the creation and all of the major additions to this over-long article have been by IPs? Including 128.... who worked on this, and only this, during a couple of weeks in August 2017? Smells like PAID, COI or autobiography. Note that in Oct 2017 this was moved from Draft to Article by Swister Twister, an editor later blocked as a sockpuppet. Oh, and once in Main space, all major additions were by IPs that edited only this article. David notMD (talk) 11:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
I cut 20% of the worst of the lazy and peacock-worded stuff, but the article is still an over-inflated mess. David notMD (talk) 11:39, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Contributing[edit]

I am glad to be here. I received a message to come to teahouse. Pleased to meed the community. I am selecting random articles and trying to follow instructions to improve. Anything else I can do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talkman45 (talkcontribs) 11:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Talkman45 and welcome to Teahouse. If you ever need help editing or contributing to this wonderful encyclopedia, come to the Teahouse. Have a read at WP:CONTRIBUTE for some ideas on how you can get started. Mstrojny (talk) 12:31, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Welcome, @Talkman45:! I like clicking "Random article" and seeing if I can find anything to improve too. Plus I discover really interesting content that way. If you haven't done The Wikipedia Adventure yet, try it -- it's a good tutorial on editing. WP:Typo_Team/moss lists lots of articles that have typos and misspellings that you can fix. And Community Portal has a "Help Out" section that has links for different types of needed improvements, to get you started. Schazjmd (talk) 13:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

hi[edit]

please tell me if i can get hired as I'm technical and need a fixed monthly income salary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theamanpuri (talkcontribs) 11:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

This is the Wikipedia Teahouse, a place for new users to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. We are all volunteers, no paid jobs, and there is no hiring. Curdle (talk) 15:12, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Referencing[edit]

Hi, when I have to add citations, I think I have to cite web / cite news. Can you please let me know what I have to fill in the fields. I don't understand difference between Date and Access Date. Appreciate your inputs. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Talkman45 (talkcontribs) 11:38, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

"Date" is the date that the source was published, "access date" is the date that you accessed the url to check that the source verifies the text to which it is being applied. Explained at {{cite web}} and {{cite news}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:10, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Complete Revision[edit]

How can I go about correcting the entry on me that is completely misleading as to who I am and what I have done? I tried to correct it myself but my submission was rejected. It's clear that I am not experienced with Wikipedia. I read where individuals are discouraged from writing about themselves, but how does one go about correcting misleading information? I'd appreciate all the help I can get. Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_HerakovichHerakct (talk) 11:45, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Herakct Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You replaced the article with essentially your resume; Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If there is incorrect information about you in the article, we want to know what it is. Please make an edit request on the article talk page explaining your concerns and any reliable sources you have to support them(unfortunately we can't just take your word for it, as any user can claim to be anyone). 331dot (talk) 11:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

IMPOSSIBLE TO PUBLISH A TRANSLATION : Draft:Lydia (payment on internet)[edit]

Hello,

I wrote the translation of a French article and I can't publish it. Someone could help me with that please ?

Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Louis Hortal (talkcontribs) 12:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Louis Hortal. I have added a header to Draft:Lydia (payment on internet) which will allow you to submit the draft for review. One thing I suggest you change before submitting it is the infobox: on en-wiki these are handled by templates: you probably want either {{infobox company}} or {{infobox software}}. --ColinFine (talk) 16:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Muzammil Ibrahim[edit]

i have just re-created a page with the name Muzammil Ibrahim a very famous and popular name Indian cinema and Modelling Industry. which was live for more than 10 years & un-necessarily deleted by some new editor which should be Protected from new users from vandalism and abuse according to the basic norms of wikipedia --Imtiyaz3333 (talk) 13:40, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the page you created (Draft:Muzammil Ibrahim) was a copyright violation so it will have to be deleted. More information on your user talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 13:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Honoured[edit]

Thanks for inviting me to the new section of Teahouse.

warm regards & lots Of love --Imtiyaz3333 (talk) 13:42, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Greetings and friendly wishes from the Teahouse to the world and back. How are you doing today? If you ever have any questions editing or using Wikipedia, ask your question and volunteers will answer as soon as possible. Mstrojny (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

My draft, Louwailou[edit]

I made a draft for a kind of famous restaurant in Hangzhou called "Louwailou" (楼外楼). But the draft was twice rejected because it read too promotional, contained too few references, and was not notable enough. I didn't think I could improve the article any further, so I got it deleted using a template.

It should be noted however, that there is an article for the restaurant on Chinese and Wu Wikipedia. Since the draft was a translation of the Chinese Wikipedia article (for the most part), it contained the nearly same issues. So I nominated it for deletion on Chinese Wikipedia, here. But if you look at the results (Google Translate if you can't read Chinese), most people there want to keep it.

What makes the Chinese article good and my English draft sub-par? It is unclear. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (talk) 14:02, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Each language's Wikipedia is independent, and has its own rules. I assume that you intended to link to Draft:Louwailou, as the page Louwailou has never existed? --David Biddulph (talk) 14:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Yes. So what you're saying, Chinese Wikipedia articles can get by with less citations than here? Ah, that makes a lot of sense now, thank you! Woshiyiweizhongguoren (talk) 14:18, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi Woshiyiweizhongguoren and welcome to the Teahouse. That restaurant is very famous and has been going since 1848 (!). It is true that all articles on English WP must have references that demonstrate their notability and verify key assertions about the subject. However, I'm going to leave some links on your talk page to sources that you could use for a draft article on Lou Wai Lou. I strongly suggest you reconsider recreating the draft using those references. Best wishes, Voceditenore (talk) 14:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Boxes[edit]

What are those boxes on people's user pages that describe themselves, and how do I get them? Woshiyiweizhongguoren (talk) 14:17, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

See WP:Userboxes Rojomoke (talk) 14:41, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Editing profile information[edit]

In 1984 I formed the McBri Corporation in the State of Florida and was awarded the rights to found and implement the Inaugural St.Petersburg Grand Prix 1985. Other than my copy of the original contract with the City of St.Petersburg, Florida and many newspaper articles, there is no record of my existence as the Founder of this Event. How can I correct this and get it in the record? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macatk1 (talkcontribs) 14:27, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Macatk1, and thanks for pulling in to the Teahouse pitstop with your question. Does it relate to this article: Firestone Grand Prix of St. Petersburg? Whilst Wikipedia can't base content on an individual document held by one person (i.e. not in a formal archive), we love seeing factual content based upon published newspapers. They don't need to be online, but we do need newspaper title, date and (ideally) page number. It's important never to add anything here form purely personal knowledge, but to only use your own form of words to describe what a newspaper says. If you have that kind of source, then the best bet for you as a newcomer is to go to the article talk page and request that someone edits the article. It helps if you suggest the exact form of rewording you would like to see, and the full citation of the newspaper upon which it is based. There can then be a discussion between editors on the best way to proceed, especially on its relevance to the topic. For more info, see Wikipedia:Edit requests, and don't forget to mention your personal involvement as you've done here (we call this a Conflict of interest) which we welcome being made clear to everyone. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 17:04, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, Macatk1, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you are asking. If you are asking for something to be added to an existing article, the best place to ask is the Talk page of that article, with a published reference. For something like that, a newspaper article is probably adequate, though that depends on a number of factors. You should definitely not add it yourself, though, as you have a conflict of interest; but if you add {{edit request}} to your request, somebody will see it and decide what edit is appropriate.
If you are asking about creating an article, then, first I would point out that Wikipedia does not contain profiles. Not one. Not even of Jimmy Wales. What it contains is neutrally written articles about notable subjects (by Wikipedia's definition). The subject of an article has, at most, a very limited role in the creation and maintenence of the article. The newspaper articles you refer to might be enough to establish you and/or the Corporation as notable in Wikipedia's sense: it depends on how reliable those particular newspapers are regarded as, how substantial their pieces were, and whether those pieces were independent of you and the corporation (as opposed to being based on an interview or press release). If these references do not meet the criteria for notability, then no article about you will be accepted, however (and by whoever) it is written. If they do establish you as notable then we could have an article about you, though you are discouraged from writing it (and in any case, writing an acceptable article is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia). It is possible that you could find somebody interested in writing such an article, but there is no guarantee - remember that Wikipedia is entirely edited by volunteers who work on what they choose. You might find somebody at WikiProject Formula One who is interested. --ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Changing Title of my article[edit]

The article i am trying to construct is showing User:MyUserName How do i fix that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wardahk09 (talkcontribs) 14:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

I see that on your user talk page there is an explanation that your Draft:Anjan Chowdhury was deleted as being a copyright violation, and the deletion log shows that User:Wardahk09 was deleted for the same reason. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:35, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Changing name of a file in wikimedia commons[edit]

Strepsiptera male (265 04) Male specimen of Strepsiptera

Dear contributors,

there's an image file that's been bothering me for some time in wikimedia commons.

It's a picture of an insect, and it has been wrongly identified. I changed the description with a better Identification, but the name of the file I don't know how to change.

Here's the page

Thank you for you help !

PS : on the file page, it is still displayed that it is used on another page. This is wrong, as I removed it from the said other page, as it was misused. Is this part updated automatically, or can I do it ?

StrepsipZerg (talk) 16:04, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, StrepsipZerg welcome to the Teahouse. As an entomologist, you'll be well aware of the significance of, and difference between, coll. & det. on museum specimens - something, sadly, that Wikimedia Commons doesn't care anything about. It has long concerned me that not enough effort is made on Commons to enable identifications to be either challenged or confirmed. Similarly, you'll be aware of the importance of retaining previous dated determinations as part of a specimen's history, and to enable the current identification to be challenged or amended in the context of the taxonomic understanding at a given point in time.
So, rather than simply changing the image name to accord with your views, I would advise first noting your concerns over the id. (Oops-have just checked and I see you did this back in 2017) My id skills only go as far as feeling, as you do, that this does indeed looks like a Psocid, and I note that was how you had changed the description. Personally, I feel it would be helpful for you to include a note in that description to indicate how it was originally described as a Strepsipteran, and included a note clarifying your own level of competence. I initially thought that the photographer might have been a specialist entomologist, but the set of images uploaded by his heirs suggest he was more of a microscopist, not specialising in any one taxonomic field - hence the greater likelihood for id error.
To actually address your question: you can request a file rename (actually a file move) using the 'Move' tab at the top of the page. (Look for the tab to the left of the search box). Once again, I suggest you include a note in that request on your own entomological competence to add justification to the name change - and do choose a suitably 'coarse' level of name to alter it to. You will also need to change the Category this file is included in. Does this all make sense? regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
StrepsipZerg, this discussion should be taking place in Commons, not here. You cannot do anything to the file from within Wikipedia --ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Seeking an Editor for a Minor Update[edit]

am not an editor nor wish to be and hope to work with someone who is comfortable with editing in wiki

have broken a world record in the field of numbers but assume it would be a conflict of interest if i post

hoping to find an editor knowledgeable in math and numbers that can understand and verify that this record was broken and to inevitably be able to update an existing wiki page out there to reflect this

other than a consumer to wiki in general as a resource i have zero experience and have never engaged with the community before and seeking suggestions how i should proceed

please advise thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.133.143 (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. You do indeed have a conflict of interest. Thanks for posting here. Wikipedia requires a published reliable source. It is not enough that somebody with knowledge of the field can personally check your work. I have broken many number world records (guess which number type from my username) and am curious about your record but even if I can check it, a source is still required. For some types of records I may be able to help get a suitable source if there isn't one already. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

i assume by editing my query is a way to respond to your comment. is the current email listed on your primerecords.dk a way to send direct correspondence? though there are wiki pages on cousin primes and sexy primes neither records in these categories seem to be cataloged by your site or caldwell's prime pages database i am writing a little early as i am still building a primality certificate through Primo would like to email you when after the (fingers crossed) certificate comes through one other question when one makes a Wiki entry does one have to use a legal name or can a pen name used in publishing acceptable enough to be used? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.57.133.143 (talk) 21:03, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello IP user. It sounds as if you are hoping to use Wikipedia to publish original research. Unfortunately, that is not an acceptable use of Wikipedia. Once somebody unconnected with you has published information about the fact that you have discovered a new prime (or whatever it was), then Wikipedia can take note of it, and cite that independent source. Until then, I'm afraid not. --ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
The email address is current. You can use it for prime number records. Wikipedia issues are usually discussed here at Wikipedia. See Help:Talk pages. Sourcing is problematic. Primes are verifiable but it can be hard to determine whether something is a record. I actually thought about adding the sexy and cousin prime records to my site years ago. I might do it now but then I would have a conflict of interest too if it's used as the source. Your username doesn't have to be related to your real name or a name you have used elsewhere. See Wikipedia:Username policy. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

How to locate an archived Teahouse conversation thread.[edit]

/* Comments on an article. */ I had a conversation going with a reviewer in this article... but can no longer locate it in the pending conversations. I can search under my user name to find my edits but still unable to locate this conversation in the Teahouse. Thanks, LorriBrown (talk) 18:40, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

@LorriBrown: Try https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_926#Comments_on_an_article. (I searched on your username in the 'search archive' box at the top of this page.) As our archives are made in chronological order, the other way is simply to work through the past archives to look for the approximate date of conversations, and then check the table of contents or use a text search. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:48, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Postscript: There was also a direct link to it in the automated message on your userpage, telling you it had been archived! Nick Moyes (talk) 19:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Was that link there when I posted this question? If so, I apologize. Also, what would the purpose be for a re-assessment of an article. Curious to know before following up with the reviewer. Thank you! LorriBrown (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@LorriBrown: Erm, no, I don't think the message was there then, actually. My bad. But I think what Legacypac was meaning by reassess was that, were you to work to improve the article as previously suggested, he/she would be willing to review it again at WP:AFC and make further observations if you were to re-submit it. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. If you want a draft to be reviewed again you need to submit it to AfC using the Submit button on the page. Someone will get to it. Legacypac (talk) 20:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: Okay, now I get it. I misunderstood what Legacypac had said. Makes sense now. The article has been re-submitted and is pending review. Thanks for clarifying that for me. Just need more patience with the process - or - a better understanding of the process.LorriBrown (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC) LorriBrown (talk) 21:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Kent Tate resubmitted a while back. David notMD (talk) 21:29, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Is there anything we can do to have someone update an old, outdated Wikipedia page about our organization?[edit]

Hi,

I tried to edit a page about the Oregon Mandolin Orchestra. But I soon was chastised for not following the rules -- my fault. My edits were reverted because I am affiliated with the orchestra and have a conflict of interest. I fully accept this rule and will no longer make any edits.

So now, I am asking these questions again: -- Is there anything that can be done for some disinterested party to do a proper scholarly update on the Oregon Mandolin Orchestra? -- Is there some way to contact earlier contributors and ask them if they are interested in editing the orchestra's entry? Thank you, Oremandos (talk) 19:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)Oremandos

The creator of Oregon Mandolin Orchestra was User:Aboutmovies, an experienced editor. You could go to that User's Talk page and leave a message, asking if that person could look at what you had added before it was all deleted (it's all still there in View history) to determine if any of the content is article-worthy. FYI - your edits revert not just because of your COI, but because so much of it was inappropriate and/or not referenced. Naming and referencing guest performers does nothing for the article. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Hi, Oremandos! The best, and recommended way for you is making a WP:Edit request at the article's Talk page. Point out the incorrect, incomplete or outdated data and provide references to sources confirming requested changes.
If you want to contact the previous contributors, just look at the article's history. You can find all of them there and check their contributions. If you find someone you'd like to talk to, just follow the 'talk' link next to that user's name. Be aware, however, that editors sometimes stop editing Wikipedia or change their interests.
Good luck. :) CiaPan (talk) 21:42, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) : Hi Oremandos Both Cullen328 and myself posted some suggestions on ways for you to try and improve the article in response to your question at User talk:Marchjuly#How do we revive a sleepy, out-of-date Wikipedia page?. There have also been a few responses to your previous post at WP:THQ#Can you help me with posting photos? ,and Drm310 also added a template which contains links to relevant pages about conflict-of-interest editing to your user talk page at User talk:Oremandos#Welcome!. If there's something about these responses that you don't understand feel free to ask for clarification. Basically, you should use the article's talk page to request edits be made to the article. The template used for making the request will alert editors that you as someone who has a conflict of interest with the subject matter is requesting that certain changes be made to the article. It make take a little time, but their are editors who move from article to article looking at these requests; so, someone will get to yours as soon as you can. This editor will assess the request and see if it complies with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. If it does, they will make the edit; if it does not, they won't and almost always leave an explanation why. When you make a request, try and keep some things in mind:
  1. All Wikipedia editors are volunteers (including those helping with requests). Edit requests are added to a queue which means sometimes you have to wait in line a bit before someone tries to help you.
  2. The editors helping to answer these requests are doing so in good faith because they want to. Each editor contributions to Wikipedia in their own way, and these editors like helping with these requests. They are neither assigned to answer them nor are they only contributing to the project in this way.
  3. The clearer and simpler your request is, the easier it is going to be for someone to help you. Some people basically copy an entire article onto the article's talk page, make a few changes, and then say this is what they want done. Long and hard to figure out requests often get jumped over because nobody feels like taking a huge chuck of time to dig through them and figure out what's actually be requested. The best requests are short and sweet; they ask for something like "Change the name of the director in the first paragraph to XXXX based upon this article [add link to supporting source here] found in this reliable source." It's also easier to answer one or two requests at a time, then a huge list of requests and helps because some editors may feel they can only answer part of the request and thus skip over it. Peppering the talk page with lots of little requests in different threads might also make it easier for someone to skip over; make one request and then wait until it's responded to before making another.
  4. Certain thing such as those described in WP:COIADVICE might not even need to be requested. Be aware, however, that Wikipedia defines a minor edit in a certain way and is generally limited to very simple corrections, so, if you make a change that is subsequently undone by another editor, it's safe to assume that it wasn't considered to be a minor change by someone.
  5. If you make a request and nobody responds in a reasonable amount of time, you can follow WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement and seek assistance elsewhere. "A reasonable amount of time" is a little subjective, but a few hours is probably not going to be considered reasonable.
  6. You can find out the name of everyone who has ever edited the article by looking at its page history; so, if you scroll back to the oldest edits made, you'll find out who created it, etc. and then can try to reach them on their user talk pages. Article creators and early contributors, however, don't have any more editorial control over article content than someone who has recently edited the article; moreover, it's possible that their edits weren't all that great to begin with and have been improved upon by others over the years per WP:CONTENTAGE and WP:IMPERFECT. It's also possible that the earlier editors are no longer active for whatever reason.
Hopefully, this answers your questions. If you have any more feel free to ask. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Lost the page I was creating before submitting to be reviewed[edit]

Hello,

I was using visual editor to create then clicked to look at source editing. I couldn't get back and think I lost all the work. Is there a way to recover (or find) the page? The page was 'Gretchen Henderson' Please use visual editor with answers.

Thank you, Ethanandsierra — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethanandsierra (talkcontribs) 21:05, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ethanandsierra: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Other than the above edit, I see no other edits by your account, nor are there any deleted edits under your account, so unfortunately whatever you were working on is probably gone, if you already tried returning to it in your browser.
I noticed that your username "Ethan and sierra" suggests that more than one person might be using your account; this is not permitted. Each account is only for a single individual and may not be shared; each person needs their own account. Please go to Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to request that your username be changed. 331dot (talk) 22:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion for real-time chat[edit]

Dear fellow Wikipedians,

Has anyone considered using Discord for the real-time chat system? It's just a suggestion, and if it's not practical that's fine.

Thanks, MrConorAE ( user | talk | contribs) 22:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, MrConorAE, welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for your suggestion. Though I'm not familiar with 'Discord', I suspect any private chat forum not managed by the Wikimedia Foundation would be totally inappropriate. All our conversations on improving articles needs to be completely transparent, and their history always visible to scrutiny. We do have direct email facility, but it is heavily discouraged for day-to-day communication, and should only be used to exchange sensitive information. Nor do we encourage off-wiki cooperation/(collusion?) to edit articles. But we do have a small number of live chat help fora, such as our Live Help channel. (Though I'm not quite sure of the relationship of WMF to Kiwi IRC, if I'm honest). But thanks very much for dropping by the Teahouse with your ideas. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:16, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Nick Moyes. Discord is a real-time online chat client that is similar to Skype. It works on a server basis - for example, a Wikipedia Discord server (is hosted by Discord) and we add channels related to specific topics. You also add roles, so you could invite Wikimedia Staff to the server to manage it. I would be happy to help some Wikimedia staff create it! Here's the official Discord website (also, it is frequently used by gamers, but a lot of other people (including me) use it too for non-gaming things...) [[1]]. Also, relating to the official Wiki IRC channels, are there any others apart from the help one?
See Wikipedia:DiscordTheDJ (talkcontribs) 23:55, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello, MrConorAE. Please see Wikipedia:IRC for a complete description of the current chat system. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:00, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Haha[edit]

Checkout this edit. Even though it's vandalism, it's kind of hilarious! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Muffin_Man&oldid=887414357. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hmmn. It's vandalism, yes, reverted 30 minutes later. I see little amusing in it, and think WP:DNFTT applies. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:49, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

AFD process[edit]

I started an AFD on Adal Kingdom, did I do it right? Can somebody take a look at it. Thank you! If not what should I do? Feedback needed. Magherbin (talk) 03:09, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Magherbin: Welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst you may have followed the AFD process correctly, I think you were wrong to have put this article up for a deletion discussion without making any prior attempt to raise your concerns on the article's talk page first, and thus giving editors more than the 7 days to consider deleting or keeping it. Do you think it is a clear case of a hoax article? Or have references simply been misinterpreted? Or have you taken this action without even checking all the sources? The former would definitely deserve deletion, but in all other cases I think withdrawing the AFD, placing a "disputed" template on the page, and raising concerns on its and any other related Talk Page would have been the right process to have followed. To withdraw an an AFD, strike out you nomination and place a !vote which says: "Withdrawn by nominator -will first address my concerns on article's talk page". Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I want to write an article[edit]

I want to create an article about a person who has stated a website www.stopfakeinkashmir.org

The article has independent source's

Kashmirspeaks1 (talk) 04:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Kashmirspeaks1. If you want to create an article about a person, you're going to have to be able to establish that said person is Wikipedia notable enough for an article to be written per Wikipedia:Notability (people). Take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for the kinds of subjects Wikipedia articles are written about. If after reading those pages you feel this person is sufficiently Wikipedia notable for an article to be written about them, take a look at Wikipedia:Your first article for some suggestions on how to actually write a Wikipedia article.
Try and remember that a Wikipedia article is written about something or someone, not for something or someone. This means that article content is supposed to only reflect things which can be verified through citations to reliable sources (generally secondary and independent sources). Wikipedia article content is for the most part not intended to reflect what a subject may have to say about itself/himself/herself; it's really intended only reflect what reliable sources (as defined by Wikipedia) are saying about the subject. Moreover, a Wikipedia article is not intended to promote the subject, their cause, or to set the record straight about something. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:47, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

I want to create a page of Kashmiri Newspapers and Magazines[edit]

I want to create a page about newspapers and magazine which are published from Jammu and Kashmir. Kashmirspeaks1 (talk) 04:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Similar to what I wrote about at #I want to write an article, you're going to have to establish that these newspapers and magazines are Wikipedia notable per Wikipedia:Notability (media).
Finally, going by your choice of username and some of the things you say you want to write about, it appears you're interested in things related to Kashmir, etc. There's nothing wrong per se about wanting to write about things related to Kashmir, but you should be aware that this particular topic tends to be quite contentious and tricky to write about even for very experienced editors. Many articles related to this particular topic are placed under Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions because they tend to attract lots of editors more interested in promoting a particular agenda than trying to write about the subject in a neutral manner inaccordance with Wikipedia policy and guidelines. So, as a new editor, you need to be very careful when editing/creating articles about this topic. Although good faith will be assumed if you make any errors, the Wikipedia community is a little less willing to assume good faith when mistakes are repeated over and over again in topics subject to discretionary sanctions than it might be with respect to other topics which are less contentous. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
@Kashmirspeaks1: Please also read this very recent Teahouse question by an editor with exactly the same interests as you. Unfortunately their dogged determination has now made it harder for anyone else to create an article on the Kashmir Observer. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:41, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello[edit]

Hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdul Rahman Farachi (talkcontribs) 08:46, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Abdul Rahman Farachi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This page is for asking questions about how to use Wikipedia. Do you have a question? 331dot (talk) 08:53, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

permission[edit]

Can i use an historic photo for a non comercial article?

For example:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houdina_Radio_Control#/media/File:Linrrican_Wonder.png

mi e-mail: <redacted>

thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.45.137.190 (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

  • We will not contact you by email, but only on this page, hence I removed your email from your post.
To answer your question, you can see at File:Linrrican_Wonder.png that it says (...) the copyright for [this image] is most likely held by the person who created the image or the agency employing the person. It is believed that the use of this image may qualify as fair use under the Copyright law of the United States. Other use of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. If you are in doubt about whether or not your use case constitutes fair use, consult a lawyer. TigraanClick here to contact me 12:50, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Italian Wikipedia[edit]

hey boys and girls, I was translating an article from the Italian Wikipedia, refreshed the page and now every time I go on the Italian Wikipedia all text appears black and illegible, can someone lend me a hand?Spaicol (talk) 11:56, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey, Spaicol welcome to the Teahouse. Don't panic. I'm pretty sure this is somehow linked to the 25th March one-day voluntary blackout of a number of European-based wikipedias, as a demonstration against the EU's proposed directive on copyright. So I don't think it's anything you've done. I would have expected you to have seen a message, as here: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pagina_principale, or here on Portuguese-wiki. But when in doubt, a page refresh or system reboot rarely does any harm. Regards from the possibly-soon-to-be-not-in-maybe-the-EU-remain-or-not UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:34, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Contact A Wikipedia Article Writer[edit]

Hello Wikipedia, I have something very personal on Wikipedia which ended up not good. So I want to fix some things up and I desperately need the help of some Wikipedians. So I am asking for one of you to send your email because it's very personal and I know on Wikipedia only the article writers and administration to help me with all things Wikipedia. Please advice. Thank you and God bless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.210.183.151 (talkcontribs)

Also note that you can edit articles yourself (subject to certain policies, in particular regarding conflicts of interest), everyone who so wishes can be a "writer" (editor) of our articles. Furthermore, most communications between editors should take place on talk pages (on desktop, click the "talk" tab in the upper left), so you should not use email (privacy-breaching information is an exception). TigraanClick here to contact me 13:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, IP editor. Welcome. I'm afraid the purpose of your question is unclear. Could you explain further, please? Meanwhile, may I offer the following possible bits of advice which may or may not be relevant to your question:
  • If you are seeking the removal of personal contentwhich (under another account) you posted in error (contact details, addresses, unfounded criminal allegations, details concerning a young person, etc) you may contact an administrator directly to remove that for you. Firstly, just delete the content with an edit summary which does not draw attention to it. Then obtain the 'diff' of that edit and contact an active editor. (I usually go to WP:AN or WP:ANI to find an active one, and ask them if I can contact them by email to arrange a Revision delete. I do NOT tell them of the exact concerns because it will be open for everyone to read - thus defeating the purpose of why I ask for their help. For the most serious breaches/accidental publishing of inappropriate detail see Wikipedia:Requests for oversight where there is an email address to contact for total removal of sensitive/personal details.
  • If you are trying to find someone to create content for you, this is best done in an open manner, and not privately. We do not encourage or promote paid editing.
  • If neither scenarios apply, please give just a little more detail here so that we can help you. If you are really concerned about something else, you may go to my Userpage and look for the left hand column link to 'email this user' to contact me, and I will try an assist further. But I am not an administrator, and I would be unlikely to email you back, and would mostly likely reply on the talk page of the IP address you are editing from - but I would be as discrete as possible.
I hope one or other of these differing pieces of advice will help you address your worries. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

The Real Man - Death of the Man from Snowy River[edit]

Just wondering if people knew the REAL MAN FROM SNOWY RIVER and what happened to him - Thank you for your time Rebecca Holmes

DEATH OF THE MAN FROM SNOWY RIVER -( Jack Riley ) McIvor Times, Thursday 23 July 1914.

Extended content

Thursday, 16th inst.— John Riley, an old mountain identity, said to be the original of Patterson's "The Man from Snowy River," died on the way from Groggin last night. He was carried on a stretcher most of the distance, and died on the road from heart failure. Groggin is 50 miles up the Murray from Corryong. Although the pace was lacking, Riley's last journey over the rough mountain tracks must have recalled to his mates the lines he inspired:— Through the stringy-bark and saplings on the rough unbroken ground, Down the hillside at a racing pace he went; And he never drew his bridle till he landed safe and sound, at the bottom of that perilous descent.

Anyone with experience of the Kosciusko country will realise the difficulties that faced the five bushmen on Tuesday morning when they set out from Groggin to bring a helpless and half-unconscious mate to the Corryong Hospital. For those who are unacquainted with this part of the State it may be mentioned that Groggin is a cattle station in the heart of the mountains, about 50 miles up the Murray from Corryong. It lies tight at the foot of Kosciusko, and is only accessible by pack tracks. The route in general use crosses into New South Wales. The other track keeps to the Victorian side all the way, but in traversing the precipitous Indi Gorge some very rough country is met with, and the grade in places is very dangerous. Gradually all the mountain roads converge into Groggin, and it is the only point from which the ascent of Kosciusko can be made from the Murray valley.

For nearly 30 years John Riley has lived at Groggin, and for that time has been in charge of Mr. J. Pierce's cattle station, which comprises most of the good land there. Familiar with every inch of the river country, he has given all assistance to numbers of tourists passing through, and was better known than probably any other man on the mountains. A fearless and dashing horseman in his young days, a first-class hand among stock, and an Irishman, open-hearted and generous, he was liked and respected by all who knew him. In bushcraft, even among the experts of the Murray, Gippsland, and Monaro, he stood alone, and it is said that some of his exploits formed the basis of Patterson's well-known verses on "The Man from Snowy River."

Gifted with the bushman's unerring sense of locality, he had a supreme contempt for the compass, and delighted to relate his experience with a party of city tourists which visited Groggin some years ago. The weather was treacherous, and Riley offered to guide the party to the top. They told him that there was no necessity for him to come, as they had a good compass. Foggy weather set in, and two days afterwards a party of bedraggled pedestrians returned to Groggin, with the one desire—to get back to civilisation. Riley said never a word. He gave them food and a drink of tea, and catching his horse, led them over the Divide, and put them on the Geehi track for home.

Advancing years and the rough life had been telling on Riley lately, but he refused to leave his mountains except for a brief visit to civilisation now and again. Word reached Corryong on Saturday that his condition was serious and some of his friends decided to bring him to Corryong to the hospital. With this object Mr W. H. Findlay, a well-known Kosciusko guide, went up to Groggin on Sunday last. Rain fell all day Monday, but a stretcher was improvised, and arrangements made for the departure next morning. Messrs A. and J. McInnes, F. Jarvis, and R. Butler assisting. About half-past 9 o'clock on Tuesday the party left the Groggin hut, carrying Riley on a stretcher, the men taking turn at the handles, and leading pack horses with provisions and blankets. The first four or five miles from the valley was covered without much trouble, but when it became necessary to climb out of the gorge over the shoulder of the Hermit Hill the real difficulties began.

The track ascends through wild scrub and rocks over 2,000 feet, and the party soon found that the task was beyond them. To make matters worse snow began to fall, and the cold became intense. In all difficulties the bushman turns to his horse, and a mounted pony provided the solution. Riley was lifted into the saddle, and Butler the lightest of the party mounted behind him. Butler held the reins and supported the half-unconscious man. Two of the others walked alongside, holding him in place, and the long ascent was successfully made. Snow was thick on the ground as they came over the top of the spur, and more was falling, but the party pushed on and ascended into the Hermit's Creek late in the after-noon. The stretcher had then to be brought into use again, and just at dark the party reached Surveyor's Creek Junction, where a deserted mining hut provided shelter for the night. Mr Jarvis went up the creek to the tin mine, and arranged for assistance in the morning, and the others made a fire and installed the patient as comfortable as possible in front of it. He seemed to rally a little, and spoke to his friends, but, the weakness reasserted itself, and shortly afterwards he suddenly swayed, and died. Out among the great trees with the rain falling gently on the roof of the hut, the old man breathed his last. The body was carried eight miles into Bonroy, in a little over four hours. Four miles further on Messrs R. Findlay and E. Pendergast met them with a buggy, and just before midnight on Wednesday the last stage of the journey was reached. An inquiry was held to-day, and the deputy coroner returned a verdict of death from heart failure. This afternoon the body of the old bushman was interred in the Corryong Cemetery, in the presence of his mates and a few friends.—"Argus."

Jack Riley 1841-1914 Born 1841 Castlebar, County Mayo, Ireland, the son of Daniel Riley and Nancy Murray. He migrated to Australia at 13 years of age arriving in Sydney, New South Wales, on 15 March 1854, aboard the ship, 'Rodney'. The young man travelled to Omeo in the Victorian high country to live with his sister, Mary Anne, Mrs Joseph Jones, and her family. After her first husband died, Mary Anne married a Mr McGown and moved to the busy gold mining area at Cassilis, near Omeo. Jack, for a time, worked as a tailor in a shop directly opposite the Golden Age Hotel in Omeo and then worked as a stockman at Monaro where he acquired a reputation for his horse handling. In 1884 Jack Riley obtained work as a stockman for John Pierce Sr., who owned land at Tooma and Greg Greg. At that time, the Pierce family owned many thousands of acres of land in the Upper Murray and owned and held leases on 20,000 acres of land at Tom Groggin, west of the main range of the Snowy Mountains. John Pierce gave Jack Riley a management role, supervising his cattle in the high country over the summer months and then the job of mustering the animals down from the mountains to the home paddocks before winter. Jack lived in isolation in a hut high up in the hills at Tom Groggin for over 30 years. He loved the Snowy Mountain Country, a good yarn and enjoyed a social drink or two. He was also a good mate of the late Walter Mitchell of Towong Station, who introduced Jack Riley to Banjo Paterson when the pair was on a camping trip. In 1890 Banjo Paterson, the poet, stayed a night at Jack Riley`s hut and Riley told the tale of one of his exploits about chasing a herd of wild horses, and from this Banjo Paterson wrote his poem "The Man From Snowy River" – he died 15 July 1914 and buried Corryong Cemetery. In 1956 a rough granite head stone was erected by Tom Mitchell in memory of him.

Photo: Jack Riley Headstone, Corryong Cemetery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RebHolmes (talkcontribs) 13:47, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, RebHolmes welcome to the Teahouse. I think it very unlikely anyone here can shed light on this for you, as our forum is only here to help editors having problems with the processes of editing Wikipedia, rather than researching content. (Though we do have a RefDesk who like getting stuck into answering unusual questions.) Using a search engine, the text you posted only returns a recent Victoria Pioneers Facebook post, and nothing else. These sorts of off-Wiki discussion groups are probably the most likely to yield information, as might also approaching local newspapers or archive offices in the region concerned. Sorry we can't help more. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:39, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

user profile set up[edit]

While attempting to upload initial user profile information, mainly name and photo of self, a photo from my own files, being rejected for various reasons. do not see a template or profile data page. please advise. Bill M. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billmf1 (talkcontribs) 14:27, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Any special code has to show on paid contributions ?[edit]

I want to become a paid contributor on Wikipedia. My question is here that Any special code has to show on paid contributions ?

Jeebonmane (talk) 14:48, 25 March 2019 (UTC)