Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 917

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 910 Archive 915 Archive 916 Archive 917 Archive 918 Archive 919 Archive 920

Helping out new editors

Lately, I have been reverting vandalism thanks to my trainer Operator873 and helping other editors at the Teahouse. I would like to know other ways I can help out and welcome new editors here on Wikipedia. Mstrojny (talk) 21:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

WP:Help desk or the WP:Village pump might interest you; until you feel confident enough to join WP:AFC. You can also join any WikiProject with a topic interesting you, but make sure that it's no (in essence) dead project, it could be quite overwhelming if you are alone "responsible" (NOT) for thousands of pages allegedly covered by a defunct project.Face-smile.svg84.46.53.245 (talk) 23:11, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for answering this question. I would like to use the thanks notification, however, there is no thank button next to your edit to this page. Why is that? Mstrojny (talk) 23:34, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
@Mstrojny: We don't have the "thank" option available for people editing as an IP address. I've been frustrated by that several times myself. Schazjmd (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
It's also frustrating for IPs, and oddly the one feature I missed most (not counting the unavailable upload feature for IPs, that happened only once in three years.) (talk) 00:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
@Mstrojny: You can look at the list of edit requests at CAT:ESP, for semi-protected pages that can't be edited by new editors. RudolfRed (talk) 00:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

What does de-redlink mean?

On Wikiproject Iowa de-redlinking is mentioned, but what does de-redlinking mean? Removing the links? Only deleting everything that doesn't have its own article? Creating the articles?Helloimahumanbeing (talk) 22:53, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I've blanked my attempt because the following answer was far better. (talk) 01:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello Helloimahumanbeing, welcome to the Teahouse. It could actually mean any of those things - it depends on the context. A quick look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Iowa shows a link on their main page to three List-type pages (such as List of unincorporated communities in Iowa) in which a large number of communities are listed, but where there are, as yet, no articles about them by that name. So the links show up as REDLINKS. So, in this context de-redlinking clearly means encouraging the creation of articles about these ostensibly notable communities so that the entries turn blue and take people to the relevant new page. You wouldn't remove these red links as, being geographical features, they almost certainly would meet our Notability criteria - in this case: Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features), and so they serve as a prompt for editors to get to work! However, had it been a 'list of people from Iowa', we would then probably wish to remove the actual red-linked entries themselves, as we require people named in lists to already have an article about them.
The interpretation of 'de-redlinking' might in other circumstances mean the removal of the coding (double square brackets) around the word or phrase which is creating the unnecessary redlinked hyperlink in articles where it is reasonable to assume that no page on that topic is likely to be created anytime soon, if ever, because it simply is not notable enough. In those circumstances the red links don't act as a prompt to editors to get to work to create pages - they simply interfere with the user's ability to easily read the page without distractions. We leave the content, but remove the internal hyperlink (known as a wikilink). You might like to read this short essay called: Wikipedia:Redlinks within reason, Bluelinks within context So judgement and experience is required on whether to leave it alone, remove a just the red hyperlink, or remove the complete entry. But if you can set to work to create the relevant article - brilliant. If in doubt, leave it to someone else to worry about, or raise your concerns or suggestions for editing on the relevant article's talk page. Does this make sense? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:55, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Previous attempt a page creation and new creations

HI. I have not been logged in since 2016. I was desperately trying to record a time in history when I created my first page, and expected to go back and edit it, but I was not in a position to and then totally forgot it was done. I would like to discuss the changes that were made and work through what was viewed or referred to as vandalism since the story was true. I also want to create a page about my parents who I've recently discovered are descendants of very significant royalty in history. How to begin this page and create a family history of my parents is my interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JodiRae63 (talkcontribs) 22:17, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@JodiRae63: Unless your parents are notable (See WP:NBIO), then this is not possible. RudolfRed (talk) 22:20, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I have discovered my mother is a descendant of multiple kings and queens and has been recognized by citizens in her community and their acknowlegement would influence the House of Windsor. How do I proceed to document this through Wikitree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JodiRae63 (talkcontribs) 22:27, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, JodiRae63. Wikitree is nothing whatever to do with Wikipedia. We cannot help you in any way here about doing things in Wikitree. If you are talking about using information from Wikitree in a Wikipedia article, the answer is no: all information in Wikipedia articles must come from reliably published sources, which automatically excludes almost all wikis. --ColinFine (talk) 23:40, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I wrote that wrong, Wikitree versus Wikipedia. I am familiar with Wikipedia and the difference of it from Wikitree. I was working on a page that I was citing sources and they were Geni sources. Why did you delete my page in Sandbox and accuse me of malicious intent. Or that I was using it for business. This page had nothing to do with a licensed corporation or Limited Liability environment. What on it made you think you could make such a claim as that? I was not solicitating nor was a falsely making claims of who the person is. It is my mother. What is the problem here with me working on a simple Wikipedia page?Jodi Rae (talk) 01:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Best way to start new article?

Hello. I joined so that I can write a new article. Is it better to just start the article with one sentence, and keep adding to it, or should I write the whole article in Word or something and then publish it when I feel it's done? thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteamboatPhilly (talkcontribs) 15:04, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:18, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SteamboatPhilly (talkcontribs) 03:33, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Submit a draft

What are the chances of my draft article being published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plortinum2 (talkcontribs) 03:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

If you are talking about Draft:Bipolar Disorder, the chances are nil. It is a copyright violation, so the draft will soon be deleted. In any case, an article already exists at Bipolar disorder, so if you can improve that (based on published reliable sources but using your own words) you can edit the existing article. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


I am beginning to put the information together for a page describing the Mongolian Order of the Polar Star, the main decoration Mongolia offers for foreign citizens (see an article from the Mongolian official news agency as a suggestion that the Order actually exists). However, there is a page for the Swedish Order of the Polar Star already, Once I have the information for the Mongolian order compiled, how do I create a page for the Mongolian order by (more or less) the same name?

I've read the disambiguation instructions and given the relative prominence of the Swedish order and the fact that there is also an Order of the Polar Star (Norway) ( that is noted at the topic of the page about the Swedish order, should I create Order of the Polar Star (Mongolia) and add it to the note at the top of the Sweden and Norway page?

Thank you for suggestions!

Julian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdierkes (talkcontribs) 00:53, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I'm aware of two possible solutions, (1) a separate disambiguation page "Order of the Polar Star" with links to the Swedish order + Mongolian order + whatever exists for this topic, in that case the Swedish page would have to be renamed first, e.g., "Order of the Polar Bear (Sweden)". Discuss it on the talk page first if you like this.
(2) On the existing page add a DAB note, something in the direction of "This page is about the Swedish order, for the Mongolian order see [[Your page with a different name]]".
There are rules or guidelines how that should be done if both topics are (roughly) equally relevant, and how it should be done otherwise, but I'd try (2) first, it requires less or no discussions, and other folks can "hug it out" if they insist on "equally". – (talk) 03:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Game reviews can make flawed cited sources

I will often times look up my favorite video games on Wikipedia and find factual errors that have been cited from video game reviews.

As an example, the article for Turok: Dinosaur Hunter states, "Enemies and boss characters have multiple death animations depending on what body region the player shot." (Citation 11 - "Setting a New Standard For First-Person Gaming". Game Informer.) In fact, enemies in Turok have simple rectangular hit boxes and the death animations are random.

How can I make an edit that contradicts a cited source when the only source I can cite is my own experience with a game? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:5C00:BD55:14B7:5C35:5F7A:54AB (talk) 03:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi 2601:1C0:5C00:BD55:14B7:5C35:5F7A:54AB, and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is you can't. That is what is know as original research, and isn't allowed on WP. The best thing you could do is post a question on that game's talk page, and another editor might know of a source which verifies your personal experience.Onel5969 TT me 04:08, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

My Greatest Question

How did life begin? - @Bewwy3

Start with Abiogenesis, Creation myth or perhaps Sexual intercourse. Also, for questions such as these we have Wikipedia:Reference desk. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
You were told (at #How many planets were discovered beyond our Milky Way? Are there any yet? above) that the Teahouse is about asking questions about editing and using Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Advice and welcome now given directly to user at User talk:Bewwy3. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:04, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

What should I do about instances of COI editing that I find?

I found a user (Bostonjfilm) who is editing a page Boston Jewish Film Festival and, based on their username, it seems to be a conflict of interest. They are also adding language which makes the article seem more like an advertisement. What should I do? I already put a {{subst:Uw-coi-username|Article}} on their talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlin04atschool (talkcontribs)

Already Reported - Violation of WP:UPOL so in this case WP:UAA is the best venue. If it's not a username policy violation the WP:COI/N would be the correct place in future. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 18:15, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • @Merlin04atschool: The article certainly read like an advertisement. Also, some of the content added by the WP:COI user was a WP:COPYVIO of the organisation's website. I've removed the copyvio text and copy-edited the rest to make it a bit less advertorial, but more work is needed on this aspect. Additionally, the article probably needs renaming because it's more about the festival's organising body than the festival itself. Neiltonks (talk) 13:27, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello All

This is my first time making and editing Wikipedia articles. I only joined Wikipedia so I could shed light on an underrated artist I discovered while doing a research project. Here is the link to my draft:

I have submitted it for review, but as I am able to still edit it I would appreciate suggestions. I would like to make the small biographical box at the top right of the page showing the birth date, death date, etc. but I don't know how. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dystopianfox (talkcontribs) 08:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Dystopianfox! Without checking the sources, I have to say that this looks very impressive. About the infobox, what I would do in your case is look at for example Florine Stettheimer, click "edit" and copy the "infobox artist" code to your draft but of course fill in the info you want. Pinging Vexations, in case they want to comment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Dystopianfox, I have added the infobox, but suspect that her date of birth is incorrect. Shouldn't it be 1875 in stead of 1857 that would make her 38 at the time of her death, closer to what one of the sources says (37). Vexations (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Could someone clarify something for me?

Hi all, could anyone confirm (or deny) if Reddit can be used as a reliable source? I'm pretty sure its not but open to corrections. Thanks Nightfury 12:58, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

My understanding is that Reddit contains too much user provided content to be a reliable source, much like us (Wikipedia). Britmax (talk) 13:08, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Yup, that's my understanding as well. You can use the sources listed in Reddit wikis/posts just fine, if they are from reliable websites. But the content on Reddit itself is too user-generated. ShindoNana talk? 13:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
There's actually a redirect: WP:REDDIT. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Interesting... Thanks all. Nightfury 15:01, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Adding a reference to one's own published work

Is it permissible to add a reference to and a brief statement about one's own published work in a refereed scientific journal? This would be added as a reference to a pre-existing article and it is directly to the point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:405:4400:B301:C17E:A86E:18A9:BF37 (talk) 13:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. With care, I think a qualified 'yes' is in order. I've done a very similar thing myself in the past, but it is essential to only add a reference that genuinely adds value to an article and is not in any way promoting oneself or one's writing, and is in a properly published book or journal of good standing. Had you linked to the article in question, or to your source, we might have been able to help you a little more. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Well put. A little more at WP:SELFCITE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:18, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Finance department life dates in titling

Hello Teahouse,

I have a question about page titling conventions.

An Australian finance department has had a few iterations, and there are varying titles as follows:

  1. Department of Finance (1976–97)
  2. Department of Finance and Administration
  3. Department of Finance and Deregulation
  4. Department of Finance (Australia)

Is there a preference for life dates in the same fashion as Department of Finance (1976–97)? I realise that the earlier listing for Department of Finance uses the dates as differentiation. But would it be appropriate to have the date listing for the other names? I’ve done examples below but is this something that would involve a page move proposal, or is it not necessary?

Department of Finance and Administration (1997–2007) Department of Finance and Deregulation (2007–2013) Department of Finance (Australia) (2013–present)

Thank you for your advice! - SunnyBoi (talk) 13:25, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

  • @SunnyBoi: (I made a minor reformatting to your post)
First of all, it may be appropriate not to have that many articles (though redirects from the appropriate titles might be warranted). One could probably merge all historical information into Department_of_Finance_(Australia)#History, as that article is not extremely long at the moment.
Assuming all articles are kept, I cannot find the guideline right now, but there is no need to parallelize the disambiguation pattern (for instance Mercury (planet) needs a DAB parenthetical because of the metal but Jupiter does not); the idea is in general to use the least disambiguation possible. If you do need disambiguation (for instance if the next iteration changes back to "finance and deregulation"), then there is an argument to keep the DAB consistent (hence Mercury (mythology), Saturn (mythology) etc. - "(god)" or "(Roman mythology)" would probably have been appropriate as long as it is consistent). TigraanClick here to contact me 16:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Snippet view of a source

Is there anyone who can tell me what "denver+d.+ferguson"+chicago&dq="denver+d.+ferguson"+chicago&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwip47GbpOfgAhVjnuAKHW8UBAoQ6AEISzAI this book source says on page 29? I'm working on Draft:Denver Ferguson, and additional info and sourcing eould be very useful. Thanks. Looks like a death notice from snippet view.. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:02, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, FloridaArmy. The maximum I've been able to extract is part of a weekly news item stating that Denver D. Ferguson, aged 62, had died that week. (no date given). It says he was formerly a night club impresario in Indianapolis and was also the owner and publisher of the first weekly newspaper in Edmundson County, Ky. Apparently he died in his own home in Indianapolis after being ill for some time. There was more, but even via a proxy server I couldn't see more than a snippet either. However, you do appear to have missed this incredibly detailed obituary (which continues on page 7 of the Indianapolis Recorder, for 18 May 1957), which should give you much of what you need to complete your draft! And if you're still stuck, there's 158 pages of entries for Denver Ferguson in that newspaper's online archive search tool. (see here) Nick Moyes (talk) 11:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
  • For the record, when you need access to more-or-less esoteric sources, the go-to place is WP:RX. The kind folks there have access to many newspapers archives, scientific journals, libraries etc. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:36, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

How do I create a second new article?

I seem unable to find a way to offer a second article for publication. Please can you give me simple instructions to do this?

IanOverington (talk) 16:14, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Creating a WP-article that isn't quickly deleted is seldom simple, but have you looked at Wikipedia:Your first article? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:31, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@IanOverington: A user can make any number of separate 'sandboxes' pages to work in. I didn't quite read your question correctly, so went ahead and made one for you, sorry. It's at User:IanOverington/sandbox2 and all I did was change the url by adding a number '2', pressed enter, and clicked 'create', then added a line of text for you and saved (published) the page to the internet. I think you've already had enough feedback for me not to lecture you on Conflict of interest and self-promotion, but you are free (within certain limits) to draft a new article or work on content there. But, as was said above, WP:AFC is probably the best place to do it, but you can always come back here and ask for a 'submit for review' button to be added to any page you've worked on. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC).

How do I change a page title?

I work for the gallery that represents the artist Glen Baxter ( Unfortunately his wikipedia page calls him a 'cartoonist' as part of the page header i.e. Glen Baxter (cartoonist). This is not correct. It should be a fairly simple change by simply clicking the move button and making the change I require. However, for some reason I do not have this option. Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucykeystratton (talkcontribs) 15:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Lucykeystratton, Hi, I already answered your question at the Help Desk. However, It appears that this person is a cartoonist, and if you do work for the mentioned gallery, you would have to declare a WP:COI WelpThatWorked (talk) 15:48, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
An editor changed title to Glen Baxter (artist). Cannot be just "Glen Baxter" because there are several Glen Baxters. Glen Baxter (cartoonist) now redirects to the (artist) article. David notMD (talk) 18:33, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Editing help and publishing help PLEASE HELP

hello, recently I have created a draft for a business and submitted it for review, I knew it wouldn't be published i was just looking for feedback now i am hoping to find someone to help me edit and publish my page. is there anyone you would recommend? if there isn't anyone how can i fix my page and get it published? I also don't know how to cite my sources correctly using the wiki platform, I've read all the links and pages others have sent me but honestly i am awful at this type of work and would really prefer professional help. here is a link to my draft — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huntermwilliamson (talkcontribs) 17:34, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

@Huntermwilliamson: I have very little time right now, and so cannot address all of your points, but unbolding the headers would be a start. It is written in a tone that, while ideal for a piece on the company web-site, is not suited for Wikipedia; for instance, "expanded its horizons", while sounding grandiose, is not a great phrase here. Reading an article about a different company (pick one, as long as there's no orange tags up top) should give you an idea of what it should look like. -A lainsane (Channel 2) 18:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Huntermewilliamson. Wikipedia will accept an article about your company only if the article can be almost 100% based on what people who have no connection with your company have chosen to write about it - not from your press-releases or interviews, but from their own independent research. The Wikipedia jargon for this is whether or not your company is notable: if it is not, then no amount of editing or rewriting can create an acceptable article about it. If Wikipedia ever does have an article on your company, it will not be your article, and you will have no control over the contents; and in general Wikipedia has no interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say, only in what independent people have said about them. So unless you can find at least three independent reliable sources with substantial material about the company, you should give up and waste no more time on it. (Note that the New Orleans City Business article, for instance, is based on an interview or press release, and so does not count). The reviewing editor, Barkeep49 judged that the references currently in the draft do not establish its notability.
On the subject of professionals: there are people who will take your money and promise to create a Wikipedia article for you; they are permitted to operate, under the rules for paid editing, but whatever they tell you, they cannot guarantee that an article will be accepted, or that it will be satisfactory for you, or that it will stay that way. My advise is to steer clear of them. Wikipedia is mostly created by volunteers, and the only effective way to get somebody to write an article for you is to engage their interest, not offer them money.
I guess that you, like many people, believe that it will be advantageous to you to have a Wikipedia article. This may or may not be the case (see PRIDE for a counter-suggestion), but Wikipedia will go along with you only as far as is consistent with Wikipedia's principles; which forbid promotion of any kind. --ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Huntermwilliamson, In addition to what everyone else said I would take a look at referencing for beginners. The long list of sources at the bottom make it hard to tell where information came from. The way I recommend trying to write an article is to find good reputable sources (what we call reliable sources and summarize, neutrally, what they say about the company. These kinds of sources shouldn't be based on press releases or interviews. Hope that helps. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:49, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


Can I write an article about what is the steps!

Faithfully, Abdallah Hossam — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Your first article. And please sign your comments with the four tildes. ~~~~ TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

John H Reagan

Good Afternoon, I would like to know how I can find out who has edited John H Reagan's page, the date it was edited and what supporting evidence they had to add or subtract from his page. I ask this because I am a 1979 graduate of John H Reagan in Austin and they are changing the name of the school due to his alleged support of slavery and allegations of his owning slaves. Any information that you cold provide would be greatly appreciated. Respectfully Todd A. English- GM1 SEAL Team 17 (Ret) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Article in question is John H. Reagan High School (Austin, Texas). David notMD (talk) 19:36, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Todd A. English. If you go to John Henninger Reagan, and click the "View history" tab at the top of the page, you can see every edit to the article in reverse chronological order, and who made those edits. The refererences at the bottom of the article provide much more information about this person. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:40, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Ah, that was better answer from Cillen328. The article John Henninger Reagan is about the person. In "View history" there are green and red numbers inside ( ). Green means content was added. Red means content was substracted. Whenever a change is made, the editor making that change is supposed to provide a brief description of what they did. The article John H. Reagan High School (Austin, Texas) is about the school. The beginning of the article about the school describes the name change and states that this will become effect for the 2019-2020 school year. Thus, rightfully the article itself still goes by the previous name. David notMD Hope this helps. (talk) 19:46, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


Hello, I am requesting for someone to clarify between citing and linking, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pktrisha (talkcontribs) 22:03, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Pktrish, welcome to the Teahouse. 'Citing' is an American term for 'adding a reference' to an external reliable source, such as a book, newspaper, journal or reliable website. This is an absolute requirement when you add a new 'fact' to an article here. If you add a fact without supporting it with a 'citation' it's quite likely that your edit will be reverted (removed). Put simply, we don't allow personal opinions here, so citing reliable published sources is absolutely essential. When you are editing an article or a sandbox page, your editing tool has a button called 'Cite' which allows you to add details of these external sources (see Help:Referencing for beginners).
By 'Link' I think you probably mean an internal connection (called a 'wikilink') from one Wikipedia page to another. So when I mention Delhi, I could link to Delhi to help users find out more information the city (see WP:MOSLINK for full details). Please let us know if this hasn't answered your question, and we'll try again for you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk)

LLGH (talk) 20:16, 5 March 2019 (UTC) Hi Pktrisha. By using linking or citing, you'll see that a link is when you clic on a word (usualy in blue) to access to another internet page ; but when you cite, you are giving a reference, more information : in Wikipedia pages, you'll see numbers that are explained at the end of the page. In brief : linking = word-link ; citing = giving external additional information.

external links to stuff page is sort of promoting

As an example, the lede on Ted Genoways, unquestionably a notable writer, names two of his books and links the titles to google books. I've seen pages that link to Amazon. Is this kosher?E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Per WP:External links, external links should be used in the body of the article in only rare cases. This is not one of them. Any links to an Amazon page, including in the external links section, are generally considered promotional as commercial links. MarkZusab (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Advice on template User:Daan1969/sandbox

Hi guys, I just wrote my first extended article (still a draft in my sandbox), using examples from other pages to make sure I was doing it the way it was supposed to be, but somehow it was detected as a G11 infringement. So I guess I missed something. I already did the speedy deletion contest, as I think I wrote an article from a neutral point of view, but any help - also for future articles about Dutch female leadership - is highly appreciated. Daan1969 (talk) 21:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)Daan1969

Welcome to the Teahouse, Daan1969. I removed the speedy tag and did a little cleanup. Please continue improving the draft. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:47, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen328, will continue improving it. Daan1969 (talk) 21:50, 5 March 2019 (UTC)Daan1969

Richard and Maurice McDonald


I noticed someone recently changed Maurice McDonald’s name to Mauric gay McDonald. This seems to be a prank. Could someone please change it?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:37, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Done. ubiquity (talk) 22:39, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Stylized caps in titles

Hi. I've seen articles around creative subjects which have stylized ways of writing the title, Mstrkrft and Pink (singer) come to mind, where the common usage of the names are MSTRKRFT and P!NK. ABBA is in all caps, but that is an acronym, so would fall under MOS:CAPSACRS. But there are other bands in which their titles are in all caps, like MGMT, STRFKR, PWR BTTM, and probably another half dozen or so. Does anyone know the specific WP policy regarding this, if there is one? Onel5969 TT me 04:13, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

No, sorry, but I'm aware of NIИ + twenty øne piløts. – (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks Onel5969 TT me 11:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
@Onel5969: MOS:TITLE, WP:MOSTM, & WP:BANDNAME. -- AxG /   11:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that, AxG - I had looked at those, along with WP:NCCAPS and MOS:TITLECAPS. And from looking at all those, the issue is, not a single one of them deals with Bands and/or titles which are in all caps. In other words, there's not a single clear guidance which says, "If a band stylized their name in all caps, like MSTRKRFT, the article title should be in sentence case, with only the first letter capitalized, of since it's a proper noun, PWR BTTM, should be Pwr Bttm. The closest matching parameter that I can point to is under the trademark guideline, which uses the examples of TIME as Time, KISS as Kiss, etc. I guess that's the one I'll hang my hat on. Onel5969 TT me 23:32, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

How would we go about editing a page so that the advertisement notification is not on top?


How would we go about editing this page so that the advertisement notification is not on top?

I am new to this.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ses ck12 (talkcontribs) 22:55, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Ses ck12. From your username, I assume that you are probably affiliated with this foundation. If so, begin by complying with the mandatory paid editing disclosure, and familiarize yourself with our guideline on conflict of interest. You should make specific proposals for improving the article on its talk page. In my opinion, this article should primarily be about the foundation itself and has excessive detail about its products and services, such as FlexBook, which has its own article. The refererences rely too heavily on the foundation's own websites and include a press release. The article should be based primarily on reliable secondary sources which are entirely independent of the foundation. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) :Hello, Ses ck12 and welcome to Wikipedia's Teahouse. I presume from your username that the CK-12 Foundation has set you the task of cleaning up the page about it? If so, you would need to declare both your conflict of interest and that you are being WP:PAID to do so. (If you follow those links, you will understand the steps you are obligated to follow to take declare paid editing, or those conflicts.) Better still, leave it to others who are not connected to clean it up, or request removal of content via an {{edit request}} on the article's talk page. Oh, and we only allow one person per user account to edit here. There should be no "we" in anything you do here.
Then, to justify removal of the "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement" template, an editor would need to remove all content that is written like an advertisement. Simple. There's tons of it to go at. If you cannot see what that content is, your are likely far too close to the subject, and too ingrained in the promotion of your own material.
Try for one glorious moment to think of Wikipedia as being a little bit like an encyclopaedia, in which content is neutrally presented, precise, factual, informative and not fully of promotional waffle and trivial detail, and is only based on citations written by non-involved people and organisations, nor is full of content linking back to the company's own website all the time. Then read the article right through from start to finish in one go and decide whether you or any other any reader really, genuinely would want to read a promotional brochure for the Foundation's products on Wikipedia when they could get all that stuff from the promotional content of the Foundation's own website. For example, the article needs very major pruning to remove what we call "WP:COATRACK content" about Flexbook which is simply not relevant to this article about the Foundation, especially when there's already another page about Flexbook they could go to. If you can imagine how well that shorter article would actually be, there's a chance you can then see how best to justify removal of that templated message from this encyclopaedia.
I suspect that even if you do have a WP:COI, not too many people (except maybe your bosses) would object to you judiciously deleting all that trivial content - just don't add any more back in, please. Hope this explanation addresses your question, though I suspect it was probably not what you wanted to read. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:03, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 Done Ses ck12 The CK-12 Foundation article has now been pruned of all promotional content. Albeit much shorter, I hope this is now seen as more succinct, more informative and more neutral in tone. Almost like an encyclopaedia! Nick Moyes (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Using Photos that are approved by a person but not licensed

Hello, I have very little experience using Wikipedia and I am trying to create a page but I am being denied every step of the way. The references are not good enough but getting them from the persons website is about all I can find. To make it even more difficult many articles that may have information published are in Japanese and I don't read or speak Japanese. I have contacted the person the page features and have been given approval to make the page and post photos that are available on their website or social media accounts. When I try to Upload the photo to wiki commons I get a message saying it must be licensed. I thought getting approval from the owner would be enough. Any help to get my page fixed and acceptable would be very much appreciated. Here is a link to the draft if you need to see what I have done so far. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akumu-Metal (talkcontribs) 17:59, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hey Akumu-Metal. In order to meet Wikipedia's standards for notability and qualify for an article, a subject needs to have sustained in-depth coverage in reliable independent sources, usually things like newspapers magazines and books, and excluding things like social media, official websites, and press releases. If this person has not yet received this type of coverage, and the only source available is their official website, then they do not yet qualify for an article.
As to uploading images on Wikimedia Commons, it is not enough that someone give permission to use the images on Wikipedia. Content on Commons must be released under a free license. If they are not willing to do so, then the content is not appropriate for upload. GMGtalk 18:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
In fact, Akumu-Metal, a person who is the subject of a Wikipedia article has almost no role to play in connection with that article. Their permission, or disapproval, is of no relevance. Most materials supplied by them will not be usable unless these are copies of reliably published independent work about them. Pictures they supply will usually not be usable unless the copyright holder (who is usually the photographer rather than the subject) agrees to license the picture freely, as GMG referred to. --ColinFine (talk) 23:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
As I mentioned before there are articles that were put into magazines and newspapers about the subject but they are all in Japanese. I have requested that the subject of the Wiki assist me in finding the relevant information and give me the links. My question is< if the articles are in Japanese will they be accepted? If the person who took the photos gives the OK is that good enough? Also the album cover photos are owned by the subject and they said I could use them. Is that acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akumu-Metal (talkcontribs) 02:40, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Adding a missing actress to wikipedia

Can you please add Mildred Washington to Wikipedia... She was a early actress. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2D80:CC06:807D:8488:9F33:8A92:F09 (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

I can't find any reliable sources on which to base an article. I'm sorry, the fan-written biography on isn't sufficient. If you can find any good sources, let me know on my talk page. Schazjmd (talk) 01:43, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree, Schazjmd. I just did a quick search at and found little about her. The original poster might want to go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. That project specializes in trying to add coverage about women (assuming they meet notability standards). Eddie Blick (talk) 03:21, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Hashtag #InvisibleNoMore (on LinkedIn, at least) supported by WikiMedia among others expires in less than three days, now is a brilliant time to tackle this article, if and only if you find good references, or the project linked above has subversive ideas about not so good references sufficient for a stub. – (talk) 04:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

For anyone interested, a draft for the article currently exists at Draft:Mildred Washington. MarkZusab (talk) 21:57, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

You found sources, @MarkZusab:, way to go! Excellent job on the draft as well. Schazjmd (talk) 02:38, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

How to go about requesting or writing article on a notable (deceased) relative

My uncle's playground sculptures became fixtures throughout the US and beyond and he was later celebrated for his mid-century modern work. From his iconic turtle (which is in SF Golden Gate Park among many other places), his porpoise, moon house, and many others (including ones that made it into a Zippy cartoon) - his work ended up defining playgrounds when they were about a child's sense of imagination instead of about hyper-safety. I believe that he is notable such that a Wikipedia page would be warranted, but of course I am biased. His later artwork has also been shown in numerous galleries. Playground work here:

Below is his bio I wrote for and some references that follow. I realize that this is NOT set up properly to be a Wikipedia page. I'm looking for advice/guidance on how to proceed. Thank you greatly in advance!

This is not the place for a draft

With his playground sculptures enjoyed by generations of children, Jim Miller was at heart an artist. He employed the traditional skills of patternmaking plus his fine art skills to create a wide variety of distinctive artwork. Jim’s father was Martin Miller, a skilled patternmaker outside of Detroit who ran his own business through the depression and from whom Jim learned the foundational skills he later brought to his work. He credits his mother, Jennie (Lindfors) Miller, with fostering his love of art.

Jim studied at the University of Michigan (1947-49) and Wayne State (1949) followed by an independent study in Europe with sculptor Ossip Zadkine (1951-52) before succumbing to the draft. He joined an intelligence unit in the Korean War, where he and his fellow soldiers invented the moniker “Porkchop Hill” and where Jim earned the Bronze Star by saving another soldiers life in an incident he rarely discussed.

After the war, Jim studied at Cranbrook Academy of Art (1954-55) and was then hired as an Instructor of Sculpture & Basic Design at the University of Michigan (1955-1960). He left teaching as he was self-described as ‘fiercely independent’ and he wanted to focus on his own work.

In 1960 he started a company, Form, to design and build playground sculptures and equipment. Over the next 21 years, Jim created his iconic work which was celebrated in the Michigan Modern: Design that Shaped America book and gallery showing in 2016. One of his most famous pieces was the Turtle, still found worldwide, with ones on display at Cranbrook, in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park and in his home City of Birmingham Michigan’s Shain Park. Another was the Porpoise, with the first ever made now on permanent display at Cranbrook. Others included his Moon House, Camel (where many are found in the Middle East), Castle, Elephant, Playwall and Basketball Standard, which is still in use throughout the United States.

In 1981, he sold Form to Wassau Tile, and focused from that point forward on his artwork using the name Jim Miller-Melberg. Melberg was his grandfather’s last name before immigrating from Sweden when he changed it to Miller. Jim chose to use it in order to stand out from the many ‘Jim Millers’ in the art world.

His work can primarily be categorized into Wall Sculptures, Sculptures and Relief Paintings. His sculpture work often included complex pattern making and metal casting, with the wall sculptures using painted plaster forms for the primary structure. Later in life when he didn’t have the stamina for the metal casting, Jim returned to his original love of painting and developed his own technique of carving a relief design on his board before employing the brushes.

Jim’s work has been displayed in many galleries, including Michigan Artists Show at Detroit Institute of the Arts (1956), Rackham Gallery at University of Michigan (1958), Play Sculpture Exhibitions at LA Museum of Science & Industry (1971,74), Extended Media – Fresh Visions at Detroit Institute of the Arts (1986), Krasl Art Center in St. Joseph Michigan (1991), Ford Gallery at Eastern Michigan University (1991), Michigan Outdoor Sculpture in Southfield Michigan (1993), Sculpture at the Matthaei at the University of Michigan Museum of Art (1999), Sculpture Invitational at the Crooked Tree Art Center in Petoskey Michigan (2004), the Michigan Modern: Design that Shaped America exhibit at the Grand Rapids Michigan Art Museum (2014) and The Art of Play exhibit at the Lawrence Technological University (2017). An interview with Jim was also featured in the Michigan Modern: Design the Shaped America book (released 2016).

Jim has sold his work privately and through numerous galleries. His most iconic sculpture, Michigan Spring, was approved by the City of Birmingham Michigan on 12/3/18 to be placed permanently in front of the town’s public library in honor of their local artist, with installation planned for 2019.

Jim died November 14, 2017, peacefully, at home, surrounded by his artwork and after a day of his close friends coming to see him one last time. A good friend and a nephew have safely stored his remaining artwork which will be made available for sale in 2019. Jim’s beloved wife Sally (Dow) Miller died in 2007; her final words were “I always loved you Jim Miller”. They went to school together as children and by random chance saw each other in Paris in 1952. It was this encounter that led Jim to return to the United States, follow the draft into war, and then to return and marry Sally. They had no children, though Sally – an accomplished concert pianist, taught children to play and Jim built playground sculptures to foster imaginative play.

Jim’s artwork gallery - Jim’s biography site - Additional References: Michigan Modern – Design that Shaped America - Scott Hocking Photo Gallery - Jim’s Obituary -

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mintonjoe (talkcontribs) 02:15, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

You'll find advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:41, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Rejected draft of Robert Beckham Mugimba recently moved to Robert Mugimba page

hello teahouse my name Robert Mugimba and i would like to know why my drafts are always declined for now almost a year. i am creating a biography and i would need help because even my pictures that i upload are always turned down. i kindly need a response on how i can be helped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert Beckham Mugimba (talkcontribs) 21:26, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Robert Beckham Mugimba. Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography and Wikipedia:Diplomatic notability. It is a poor idea to try to write an autobiography on Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:52, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Welcome Robert Beckham Mugimba! Building on such advice, I also suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:No original research. If you are gonna write an autobiography, I suggest you try to get other editors to pitch in so that they can put in their point of view. YouGottaChill (talk) 03:15, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
Sent to MfD and a block requested on the editor. He keeps removing the AfC declines and resubmitting. Legacypac (talk) 03:51, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Collective Causation: Entry Denied

Dear Wikimedia Community,

I am a science textbook author and educator. I've been researching linguistic anthropology as it might apply to global warming and similar issues where there is a lack of language describing "micro causations" culminating in a "collective causation". I've learned that for a society to get a handle on an issue, there first must be a language describing that issue. For example, in the 1950s, Robert Levy was able to correlate high rates of suicide in Tahiti to there being no word for "grief" in the Tahitian native language. Similarly, in modern society, we are short on language to describe the underpinnings of issues such as global warming, lung cancer, drunk driving, elections, pollution, and more. These are all examples where seemingly insignificant, but numerous "micro-causations" combine to provide a very real "collective causation".

In my teaching, I would like to be able to use these very terms to help my students understand the root of many modern problems, most notably global warming. Understanding and appreciating the root of a problem is key to 1) believing there's a problem, 2) accepting responsibility for the problem, and 3) taking personal action to relieve that problem.

I attempted to create a Wikipedia entry for the term "Collective Causation". My entry, which is my first ever, was promptly declined for being too "essay" like. I had tried the sandbox and studied various help pages, but to no avail.

Thank you for any assistance or editing suggestions you are able to provide for allowing this entry. I will paste the entry below. Thank you for this consideration.

Good chemistry,

John Suchocki, Ph.D. Conceptual Chemistry, et. al. Founder, Conceptual Academy

Display collapsed, as not the place for a draft

Collective Causation Also expressed as collective-causation, which is the sum result of numerous micro-causations. People are generally familiar with a direct causation. Tip over a glass of milk. This directly causes the milk to spill. Hit your toe against a corner, and this causes pain, depending upon how hard you hit the corner. A collective-causation is more difficult to appreciate. While one cigarette won’t cause lung cancer, smoking many cigarettes over many years most likely will. The habitual smoking of cigarettes is thus a “collective causation” of lung cancer. Each cigarette, in turn, is a “micro causation”.

One might ask: Does a one beef steak cause arteriosclerosis? Does one child not getting vaccinated cause an epidemic? Does one vote impact an election? Does one water bottle thrown out the car window cause a plastic problem in the oceans? Does one drive to the grocery store increase atmospheric carbon dioxide? Does one raindrop cause a flood?

These are all examples of micro-causation. For all of these, you have a little event that can add up to a large event when the numbers are also large. The answer to all of the above questions, according to the idea of collective causation, is yes.

As the human population continues to soar, collective causations will become all the more notable. And because the rapid rise of the human population is ever so recent, the very idea of collective causation is not generally recognized. This is particularly problematic when it comes of the issue of global warming. When one’s actions account for only a tiny fraction of the whole, then blame for the collective causation is easily discounted and not personal.

Similarly, collective causation explains, in part, why quitting the smoking of cigarettes is so difficult. The danger posed by one cigarette (one micro-causation) is truly miniscule, but not zero. Because miniscule and zero are relatively close to each other, the smoker may thus erroneously equate the two.

Likewise, it is easy to discount the combustion of one tank of gasoline as a significant cause of increases in the atmospheric level of carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas. Truly, it is not a significant cause. But it is, in fact, a micro-causation, which means a collective causation is inevitable when there are so many people burning through tanks of gasoline.

Connecting the results of any collective causation to its micro causations is key to solving any problems that arise. As an example, drunk driving is a collective causation of thousands of highway deaths each year. The micro causation is an individual drunk driver, who still stands a chance of making it home safely without harming anyone. When cars were first introduced, the collective causation of drunk driving was not recognized. Public awareness efforts by organizations such as Mother’s Against Drunk Driving, schools, and police departments have helped to change the culture to the point where the connection between the collective causation and the micro causation has become generally recognized. Such a shift in culture takes decades of sustained public awareness efforts and is something that will need to be maintained indefinitely. In short, because micro causations are so easily dismissed, unlike direct “macro” causations (such as spilling milk), getting the public to do something about it is quite the challenge.

All the more so with global warming given that the results of the collective causation are long term, unpredictable, and generally not as visible to us as a horrid car accident scene.

An important first step will be bringing the terms “collective causation” and “micro causation” into our daily language. When this is the case, identifying the problem and pushing for micro causation remedies will be all the more possible.

The terms collective causation and micro causation were generated by John Suchocki in the development of his Big Picture podcast series. He gives thanks and recognition to linguistic anthropologists, such as Robert Levy, and cognitive scientists, notably George Lakoff.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnSuchocki (talkcontribs) 04:15, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

The policy is at WP:Neologism. If/when the topic has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple published independent reliable sources it would then be considered notable in Wikipedia's terms and could be the subject of an article. Your existing draft had no references at all. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:33, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  • * * *

Thank you! -John — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnSuchocki (talkcontribs) 04:51, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Adding a band to Wiki


I’m tryig to add a band that I work with to Wikipedia. They’ve been together over 5 years. Have produced a couple larger hits one most notably entitled “Patagonia”

I submitted a draft to get a feel for how I would need to write and edit the content. Two separate moderators responsed saying my draft is not eligible and the content is not Notable.

Can someone help me get off on the right foot and complete this Wiki article?

Kind Regards,

Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dancesnitch (talkcontribs) 06:42, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi Dancesnitch. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles and Wikipedia:Too soon. You need to be a honest in your assessment of the band's Wikipedia notability because a lack of Wikipedia notability is one of the main reasons why an article ends up deleted. If after reading through these pages, you still feel that the band is Wikipedia notable enough for a stand-alone article to be written about them, then perhaps one can be written.
Writing a proper article can be a bit hard if you're not very familiar with Wikipedia editing, but you can find some guidance on this at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Music. You might also be able to find a few editors experienced in writing articles about bands at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music. For what it's worth, a poorly written article about a Wikipedia notable subject can be usually be fixed; however, excellent writing and formtting is not going to make a difference if the subject lacks the significant coverage in reliable sources typiclally required to establish Wikipedia notability. So, you're going to need find those sources, write your draft based upon what's written in them, and then add citations to those sources to the draft for verification purposes if you want Draft:Patawawa Band to eventually be accepted by a AfC reviewer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:07, 6 March 2019 (UTC)