Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 935

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 930 Archive 933 Archive 934 Archive 935 Archive 936 Archive 937 Archive 940

2018-19 Australian region cyclone season

Hi, I made edits there and it didn't show up even though it says in the edit history that I made edits. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 07:54, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Your edits are the last edits to that article, as shown here. I see nothing that would prevent them from showing; perhaps you need to clear the cookies in your browser. Also, if you use the back button to return to that article, it may bring you to an older version of the article. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
This has happened for a while on tropical cyclone pages for a while now. 185.69.145.183 (talk) 08:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
The article is under pending changes protection. It appears the mobile version of the site does not show that. Click "Desktop" at the bottom to see the desktop version. When a page under pending changes protection is edited by an unregistered (also called IP) editor or a new user, the edit is not directly visible to the majority of Wikipedia readers, until it is reviewed and accepted by an editor with the reviewer right. The desktop page history shows your IP address has five pending changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:49, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Edits seem reasonable (ie not obvious vandalism), so I've reviewed them for you. They should now be visible. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 12:31, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
It's not showing up again. 86.141.93.166 (talk) 17:55, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Same reason, same cure. Perhaps you might consider creating a username for yourself. One you've passed the trivial "new user" stage (4 days and IIRC 10 edits) you will no longer be caught in just this way. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Now I can't edit the article. WHY!? 86.141.93.166 (talk) 19:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
The article has been semi-protected. Your earlier edit had been reverted, but instead of discussing the matter on the article talk page in accordance with WP:BRD you made a similar edit again. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, help me create a page,please

hello,help me create a page,please— Preceding unsigned comment added by Albertbruni (talkcontribs)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse Alberbruni, please specify what you need help with. Hurricane Bunter (talk) 20:06, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Signature issues

I'm having a problem with my talk page not linking correctly in my signature. See my signatures at User_talk:StaringAtTheStars#91,000,000; they are not linking correctly! I've checked my preferences to make sure I did link it, and I did (and it for some reason links properly there). Previewing edits will also link correctly to my talk page. Is there something wrong I did? Please see below if there's anything I'm missing on it, because I can't find it.
<span style="font-family: Century Gothic, Arial, sans-serif">'''''[[User:StaringAtTheStars|StaringAtTheStars]]'''''</span><sup>[[User_talk:StaringAtTheStars|✉Talk]]</sup>
StaringAtTheStars✉Talk

Your signature here links OK to your user talk page. When you use it on your user talk page, it won't try to link back to itself, see WP:SIGLINK. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I see, thank you! StaringAtTheStars✉Talk 18:13, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
StaringAtTheStars, if you want, you can change the link to [[User talk:StaringAtTheStars#top|✉Talk]], which will always link to the top of your user talk page, even if the link is on said page. Eman235/talk 20:45, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

does banned user will get this message

normaly i only head this type message (MediaWiki:Blockedtext) to blocked user, does this message also apply to banned user? Scout MLG (talk) 23:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@Scout MLG: I would guess not, since a ban does not actually stop someone from editing. But, a banned user may also become blocked to enforce the ban. RudolfRed (talk) 23:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

What are the notability guidelines for bus station articles?

So I randomly reached Sunshine Plaza bus station and was shocked by it's existence. So now I can literally create pages for each of my local bus stations? This is a global free-for-all online encyclopedia, but that doesn't mean we can dump in whatever seems convenient. I was considering MultiAFDing all of them under "Bus interchanges" at Template:TransLink (South East Queensland) bus stations, but asking here would be wiser. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 20:41, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

@ImmortalWizard: On the surface, it would seem to fail WP:NPLACE. Not sure if there has been any discussion on this topic already that lets them stay. RudolfRed (talk) 21:28, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@ImmortalWizard: Some discussion history here: Talk:Bus transport in Queensland. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@Timtempleton: that didn't lead to anything unfortunately. Besides, that article is vastly different than about bus stations anyways. THE NEW ImmortalWizard(chat) 21:18, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
@ImmortalWizard: Some editors have gone so far as thinking each darned bus stop where they live is notable. Makes me want to get on a bus and go tell them they're not. If only I knew where the nearest bus stop is. Wanders off to check, ermm, Wikipedia... Nick Moyes (talk) 22:20, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: It's even worse on Chinese Wikipedia. Woshiyiweizhongguoren (🇨🇳) 11:26, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
@ImmortalWizard: A reminder to be careful if you do a MultiAFD of these bus stations. Some of them may be notable, so you will have to do the work to make sure the ones you're nominating fail WP:NPLACE, otherwise you risk a WP:TRAINWRECK. SportingFlyer T·C 05:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Example of a trainwreck AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edgware bus station. CoolSkittle (talk) 02:12, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

How can I send massages to friends?

How can I send massages to friends? Pls help. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S201501105 (talkcontribs) 02:16, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@S201501105: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please understand that Wikipedia is not social media to be used by people to communicate with their friends; this is a project to create and maintain an encyclopedia. If you want to help do that, we would love to have you. You can communicate with other users by using their user talk page; most users have that linked to in their signature. However, discussion must pertain to work on this project. 331dot (talk) 02:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello fellow editors

I want to create a bot to help tackle vandalism can someone help me with creating one please. Name:VandlB0t. Thanks Hurricane Bunter (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism. There are already several bots that revert vandalism. David notMD (talk) 20:16, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
@Hurricane Bunter: Not sure what you are asking for. To learn about fighting vandalism, check out WP:VANDALISM and WP:CVUA RudolfRed (talk) 20:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Anything I can use to revert vandalism. Tell me. Is twinkle one? I want someone to work with me to make a bot to revert vandalism. Hurricane Bunter (talk) 20:24, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
See Help:Creating_a_bot. Also, WP:TWINKLE and WP:HUGGLE. RudolfRed (talk) 20:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
As you just became an editor today, I recommend you learn about the existing anti-vandalism bots and groups rather than seek to create a new bot. David notMD (talk) 20:59, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

See User:ClueBot NG for example of an anti-vandalism bot. David notMD (talk) 03:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay thanks. Hurricane Bunter (talk) 08:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Please help me improve my draft submission on Jem Bendell

Hi there, I'm trying to initiate an article on Jem Bendell. I've only made minor edits in the past, not submitted whole new articles.

I am in no way related to Bendell. I became interested in his contributions as his name has started appearing in the media since the beginning of 2019. I've seen his name mentionned next to Rupert Read's. These two academics have a similar profile as far as I can tell, so I thought Bendell should equally have a page on Wikipedia.

I've looked at qualifying criteria from Wikipedia:Notability_(academics), and I think Bendell meets 3 of them:

  • 1. The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources.

Criteria met: by coining the concept of Deep Adaptation, he has influenced a rethink of the discipline of sustainability management in academia (e.g. https://www.uea.ac.uk/philosophy/news-and-events/-/asset_publisher/wb9yCV6yd5EC/blog/after-the-ipcc-report-climatereality-by-rupert-read?inheritRedirect=false)

  • 2. The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level.

Criteria met: in 2012, the World Economic Forum appointed him a Young Global Leader for his work on sustainability. (https://www.cumbria.ac.uk/study/academic-staff/all-staff-members/iflas/professor-jem-bendell.php)

  • 7. The person has had a substantial impact outside academia in their academic capacity.

Criteria met: his seminal paper Deep Adaptation was widely commented by the media (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/08/theres-worse-climate-news-than-the-mendocino-complex-fire.html, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-26/new-climate-debate-how-to-adapt-to-the-end-of-the-world, https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/vbwpdb/the-climate-change-paper-so-depressing-its-sending-people-to-therapy), also numerous talks to global organisations e.g. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, some of them on YouTube


Could you help me improve my draft submission Draft:Jem_Bendell please?

If you wish a response, it's usually beneficial to sign your post with four of these tildes: ~ Quisqualis (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
I looked over your article, and the elephant in the room, beyond [citation needed], is that nobody will have a clue about "Deep Adaptation". A paragraph is needed in the Career section to explain the concept and its relevance.--Quisqualis (talk) 22:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)


OK, thank you for the guidance. ~ Ndaniau (talk) 08:26, 4 April 2019 (UTC)


I've made the changes as recommended with extra references and corrections. How to I mark the Draft ready for a second review please? ~ Ndaniau (talk) 09:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

The Syriacs

I always thinking why we don't have our own country like any Nationalism in the world have a country . Why we still haven't our country — Preceding unsigned comment added by MALK.FILO.sy (talkcontribs) 23:37, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

This is not the place for this question, you might want to ask Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. For the record, Syria and Iraq were poorly planned out by the British Empire, so you have a valid point. RedPanda25 23:40, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
For interest, MALK.FILO.sy, Syriacs are far from alone in not having their own country. See our article Stateless nations. The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 10:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Submission Rejected

Hello, I recently came across a page about this years GAA championship in my county and I noticed that not a lot had been done on it yet. I seen a notice on top of the page saying that the submission was rejected on the 10th of February.

I have added a lot of information and I am just wondering if I apply for it again will it be accepted do you think? The page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:2019_Meath_Senior_Football_Championship#Participating_Teams — Preceding unsigned comment added by Royaler123 (talkcontribs) 22:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Since the draft was previously declined you haven't added any further references to published reliable sources; it appears that much of the information in the draft is unsourced. Note also that the dates you've added are not in accordance with MOS:DATEFORMAT so that's something that you ought to sort out before you resubmit the draft for further review. Not grounds for deletion, but something which you ought to address, is compliance with the rest of the Manual of Style, such as putting section headings in sentence case rather than title case. A further point for future reference is that it is cleaner to give a wikilink like Draft:2019 Meath Senior Football Championship#Participating Teams rather than a url like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:2019_Meath_Senior_Football_Championship#Participating_Teams --David Biddulph (talk) 10:17, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
[Edit Conflict] Hi, Royaler123. I think myself that the reviewer was a little harsh. Sports seasons' articles are often started long before the actual commencement of the season – for example, the 2019 IndyCar season article was started in March 2018, a year before the first event. However, in such a prominent competition there is often a good deal of reliably sourced facts even so early, concerning (in that case) new regulations, planned new teams, driver transfers and recruitments, new regulations, new events, event schedules, etc.
You seem to have made an excellent start, but declined drafts are usually declined again unless significant improvements are made to address the reasons given – resubmitting without doing so usually earns a second decline and a hardening of attitude.
If you can over the next few weeks gather further, well-sourced information about the 2019 Championship and its participating teams and players, analogous to the motor-racing-relevant ones I mentioned above, and also address the other points made by David Biddulph above, I think a re-submission would stand a good chance of success. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.200.138.194 (talk) 10:44, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Ages?

I noticed that Robert Downey Jr. was born on April 4th 1965 in New York, where it is April 4th 2019 as I am typing this, yet his age is still being reported as "53", not "54". (I think that by now it is April 4th everywhere in the world, even in the last time-zone up against the date-line, so his location of birth perhaps no longer matters as it did earlier today.) So I asked myself "What on earth has happened to the machinery there?" In the past I've never noticed an age-discrepancy and I assumed that if the age was "53" and we did "view source" we would never see a typewriter-character of "5" followed by a typewriter-character of "3" in sequence to make the TEXT (not the number) "53". It had been my assumption, since ages were never inaccurate, that what we'd see there is a formula based on NOW() minus the date (or maybe the date-and-time) of the birth. Most but not all Februaries are 28 days; most but not all years are 365 days; most but not all four-year-long sequences (exceptions having occurred in the lifetime of the oldest living person) are 1,461 days; most but not all 100-year-long sequences of days(exceptions having occurred in the lifetime of the oldest living person) are 36,524 days. Because of these wrinkles the age of a person can't be determined simply by subtracting their birth date from NOW(), dividing by 365 and rounding down to the highest integer. However, it is still possible by a more elaborate formula to determine their age in such a manner as would show a "54" today for any person born on the same day as Robert Downey Jr..

So, I thought the formula was broken. Oh it truly is, for it's not a formula. I did a search for "age" in the source and found a "53". Checking on various random Wikipedia articles about various random living persons, I found that NONE of them has a formula. And yet the age of an Indian actress whose birthday was yesterday is correct. It is HARD TYPED, but it is correct.

So, what is going on here? Are you actually EDITING the article of EVERY PERSON on their birthday? Does it take you more than a day to get it caught up, and is that why Downey's age is being misreported today? Wouldn't it be better just to delete any hard text and put there a formula that would display their age? You could put a footnote somewhere that everyone born on June 1st becomes one year older when 11:59:59.99pm May 31st Universal Time flows into midnight June 1st Universal Time, regardless of the time of day and time-zone in which they were born. I think that as long as that fiddle was understood to be the case, nobody would complain. I didn't complain when I got to drink beer legally at midnight on my birthday even though I knew I had been born around 7:00am.74.64.104.99 (talk) 23:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

You are correct, ages should not be hard coded, and there is a formula that should be used: Template:Birth date and age. The formula may not be perfectly accurate, I'm not sure, but it is at least accurate to within a day. Feel free to replace any hard coded instances with this formula if a birth date is available. RedPanda25 00:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
I guess you refer to the html source displayed with a feature called "view source" in your browser. In Wikipedia, "View source" refers to a tab at top of protected pages like Robert Downey Jr. if you are not logged in or don't have permission to edit the page. The tab is usually called "Edit" and displays the wikitext of the page. Editors only edit the wikitext. Our MediaWiki software then processes the wikitext and only sends the result to your browser. Nearly all infoboxes use a formula in the wikitext to compute the age. This includes Robert Downey Jr. which says {{birth date and age|1965|4|4}}. The processed wikitext is cached for performance reasons. If you view an article on or shortly after the subjects birthday then you may see a version which was cached before the birthday and has not updated the age. I have now purged Robert Downey Jr. so it says "age 54". By the way, automatic date and time features in MediaWiki use UTC. This can briefly give an age which is not correct in the subjects own country even if there is no cache issue. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

biography

please I want my biography on Wikipedia cause i'm a musicianso I want to know how can I write it ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tebogolee (talkcontribs) 11:22, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Tebogolee: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is strongly advised that you do not attempt to write an article about yourself, please read the autobiography policy. This is discouraged because people naturally write favorably about themselves, and Wikipedia tries to be neutral. If you meet the notability criteria for musicians written at WP:BAND, someone will eventually take note of you and write about you. Also please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. If an article exists about you, any content that appears in independent reliable sources can be in it, be it good or bad. You can't keep others from editing it or dictate what appears there. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Requesting a page

Hello! My boss would like to have a page created about him. How can I make that happen? I know I need to request a page, but I can't seem to figure out how to do that. He's the current president of South Dakota State University. He has a bio on SDSU's web page: https://www.sdstate.edu/office-president/about-president-dunn. Any help would be appreciated! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kann123 (talkcontribs) 15:25, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

@Kann123: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You can request that an article be created at Requested Articles. Be aware that RA is severely backlogged, though. Also please be aware that Wikipedia is not concerned with whether a potential article subject wants a page or not; if the subject merits an article according to our notability guidelines(for people, WP:BIO) and are noticed by independent editors in independent reliable sources, someone will eventually write about them. As a university president, he may merit an article, but if one is created, he (or you as his represetative) would have no special control of it or rights to it. See WP:OWN. It seems like you have read about conflict of interest, but if you haven't, please do. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Your boss also should be aware that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable, see this essay. 331dot (talk) 15:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

What is the preferred date format for citations?

Hi,

I'm new to this. I've seen a couple of different dates formats across pages used for citations. For example, one page had April 4th 2019 but another had 04.04.19. Does this differ from page to page? When I tried to use the 04.04.19 format on a page that had the date written out, Wikipedia flagged it up. However, the number format was definitely accepted on the other page.Avalon of Sussex (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Avalon2828 As far as I know, the preferred date format is the former one i.e. 4 April 2019. That's the format i have saw most peoples using and also that's the preferred way by Wikipedia too. See WP:REFB for the proof of it. I don't know where you saw that citation with the other format, so if you can provide the link then it can be useful for both you and me. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 15:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
@Avalon2828: The full description of acceptable date formats is at Help:Citation Style 1#Dates. The other guideline to bear in mind is that when editing an existing article, you should stay consistent with whatever format is already used. It is a lot easier for the reader if the dates are all in the same format, at least within one article. Personally, I am a strong opponent of anything like 04.04.19 because it can be ambiguous, but that's just a personal view.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:07, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Don't use 04.04.19 or anything like it. Today is special, one of only twelve days in the year when the US date format looks the same as elsewhere. Normally there is confusion. Consider tomorrow. In the US it will be 4/5/19, for most of the rest of the world it will be 5/4/19. The accepted styles are given in the manual of style at MOS:DATEFORMAT. Basically always include the month in words and a four digit year unless using the ISO format 2019-04-05. HTH, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you all for your responses. @Levent Heitmeier this is the page that used the numbered date format: Yoel Romero. @Gronk Oz @Martin of Sheffield I did think that writing the date in full would make more sense as to not cause confusion between different countries, so thanks for confirming this. But again, keeping it consistent with the other dates on the pages is important too, I suppose. Avalon of Sussex (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Could you please clarify where on Yoel Romero you are seeing dates formatted as 04.04.19? As far as I can see the formats in that article are in accordance with MOS:DATEFORMAT. The article seems to be using formats such as September 2, 2001 in the text, and sometimes formats such as 2001-09-02 in references. In either case they are unambiguous. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:39, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
(ec) @Avalon2828: I agree it's good to keep consistency of dates (as well as other types of data) across an article. However, readability (and intelligibility) is much more important. So, if data already present use ambiguous format, it's IMHO much better to add new data in an unambiguous form than sticking to consistency. --CiaPan (talk) 10:47, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
P.S. Please WP:SIGN your comments. CiaPan (talk)

@David Biddulph: Yeah, my bad. It was actually the 2001-09-02 format that I was referring to (I must have read it wrong at first). But this can still cause confusion between countries that display the day and the month in different orders? @CiaPan:I totally agree with you. Thanks again everyone for your help!Avalon of Sussex (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

I don't believe that any nation uses a yyyy-dd-mm format; it is always yyyy-mm-dd (as in ISO 8601). --David Biddulph (talk) 16:45, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Need Help with Editing Benjamin Bradley page

Hi my name is Kirstyn Prager and I am editing Benjamin Bedley's page for Dr. Vans, Early American Hist. at Cal Poly Pomona.shalor toncray is our wiki assistant. My question is that I have discovered the true name of Benjamin Bradley which is Benjamin Boardley, how should I add this other name. Should I create a new page and ink it to the Benjamin Bradley page? And if so, could you please direct me on how to do so.Or should I add the citation on the same page since so many books have been written about him with the wrong name? Thank you. Kaprager (talk) 22:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)kaprager

Hello, Kaprager. If you have a reliable published source, then you can add the information to the article Benjamin Bradley (inventor), citing the source. If the bulk of the sources used the name "Bradley", then the page should not be moved (renamed). But what you can do is to create a redirection: create an article Benjamin Boardley (that shows as red at present because the article doesn't exist) containing the text #REDIRECT [[Benjamin Bradley (inventor)]]. Then anybody that goes to the Boardley page will automatically be sent to the Bradley page.
Incidentally, Wikipedia is not interested in whether you are editing for somebody else (unless you are editing an article about that somebody else or a person or organisation that person is closely connected to: in this case, you would have a conflict of interest). It is also not interested in whether somebody is your "wiki assistant": as far as Wikipedia is concerned, both you and your wiki assistant are editing only for yourselves, and are responsible for your own edits. --ColinFine (talk) 00:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Thank You!!!Kaprager (talk) 16:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)Kaprager

Autoconfirm Status

My account is 4 days old and I have made nearly 55 edits that why am I not yet autoconfirmed? If a user dies that then consider it as a reminder. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi Levent Heitmeier. Your account is 3 days and 13 hours.[1] Autoconfirmation requires 4 full days. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:33, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
But when you open my user page it shows below my name that I joined Wikipedia 4 days ago which as far as I know is true. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 17:40, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
@Levent Heitmeier: I understand why you are confused. The issue is with rounding differences. On your userpage, the counter rounds to the nearest full day; the "autoconfirmed" counter always rounds down, so that when an account is between 3.5 and 4 days old (as yours is) there is a discrepancy. In 11 hours, you will be autoconfirmed. -A lainsane (Channel 2) 17:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for informing me about that! Wish you a very nice day. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 18:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
PrimeHunter My account is now more than 4 days old but it hasn't got autoconfirmed yet. Can you please check what the problem is? From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I just checked, and you are in fact autoconfirmed. If you got to your userpage, and hit the "user rights management" link on the left hand side of the page you can see what rights you have, autoconfirmed is not one of the checkable boxes and will appear above the main list. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:23, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
I think that "user rights management" is visible to admins but not to mere mortals. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
You are autoconfirmed, as shown here. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that is the target of the "User rights management" link admins have on user pages (we see more on that page as hinted by Beeblebrox). You can also see your own account is autoconfirmed at Special:Preferences. @Levent Heitmeier: What makes you think you are not autoconfirmed? PrimeHunter (talk) 19:08, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
PrimeHunter Actually my way to check that was a bit different. I opened my contributions, clicked on any one of them and below you can get your user name and your status like administrators, Rollbacks etc. In my case it was blank so i thought that i am not auto-confirmed. Anyways thanks! From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 04:05, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
@Levent Heitmeier: I have added [2] this to the description of that feature: "The automatically assigned autoconfirmed user is not displayed here but can be seen at Special:UserRights." PrimeHunter (talk) 10:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Levent Heitmeier is editing from mobile where user groups are displayed prominently in diff pages. @Levent Heitmeier: You cannot see "autoconfirmed" there because it's not actually a right, but rather a check that's done by the software every time you try to edit. – Ammarpad (talk) 18:03, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Capitals in a Title

How do I change the capitalization (but not spelling) of the words in the title of a Wikipedia article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeklinCaban (talkcontribs) 14:10, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

@DeklinCaban: You would move the article to the correct title, with the proper capitalization. To move an article, see the guidance at HELP:MOVE. --Jayron32 14:33, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
@DeklinCaban: Please read WP:TITLEFORMAT before you do any more of this. "T-Pose" is not correctly capitalized under Wikipedia's style manual; it should be "T-pose". For example, if your subject line for this Teahouse thread was an article title, it would be correctly capitalized as "Capitals in a title". Thanks. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 18:07, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

article denied because of quote

Hi, I had a submission denied because someone said my quote was copyright infringement. I don't understand why. The quote was a quote an author made, talking about herself and why she became an author. This SHOULD fall into the fair use category. I'm certain any attorney would say so. I was not quoting from a book or any other published material. The quote came from the publisher's page about the author. Again, fair use. Are we not allowed to quote anything or anyone? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marionwalsh (talkcontribs) 18:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Marionwalsh and welcome to the Teahouse. I am not an administrator, so am unable to see the content that was deleted, or comment on it directly. But your talk page messages clearly suggest you used quite a lot of text that was lifted directly from a copyrighted page (here). Short quotes are acceptable; long ones aren't, and there's quite an interesting essay on the subject at Wikipedia:Quotations. I know how frustrated you must feel, having your draft deleted. This only happens when copyrighted content is not quickly removed. Now, if you put in a lot of work into the draft and want to get a copy to start over again, you could contact the deleting administrator and ask them to email you a copy (making sure, first off, that you have already set up an email address in the first tab of your Preferences). Hope this helps. I've left a nice friendly welcoming message full of useful links on your talk page, and hope this doesn't put you off editing. I should point out that creating a new article is the hardest thing any editor can do here - it's especially challenging for new editors who haven't yet had enough time to understand our policies and ways of doing things. We generally advise everyone to start of slowly by making small edits to existing articles before moving on the whole new pages. Regards from the UK,  Nick Moyes (talk) 19:10, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Gazetteer/Carographic reference where?

Hello, hope you're doing well. I'm wondering where to put mapcrow.info

Unlike smaller sites, it includes several million cities more than the major cities. It matches automatically, on nonLatin characters, does sound matches, and finds alternate names such as Peking. It also includes an interactive map. There are pre-filled city lists for every state and country, along with distance charts for individual continents.

It includes a complex, customizable flight time calculator, meeting time calculator,suburb and mountain peak searches and many related searches.

Dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mapcrow (talkcontribs) 20:52, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Mapcrow. Welcome to the Teahouse. The honest answer is that you should not put it anywhere on Wikipedia. I'm pretty confident it wouldn't met our notability criteria for websites, which is the bar that all articles have to meet. (That said, it's a nifty look-up tool which works OK for the first search, but then is really hard to see where to start a second one.) You username suggests you represent the company, so please don't try to promote your product here yourself, noting that you have a Conflict of Interest and a username that would breach our WP:USERNAME guidelines were you to edit anywhere further on Wikipedia. Sorry to disappoint you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:52, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

How do I create a template?

Hi. I do not know how to create a template and would love to create one, can I please be told how to. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MetroManMelbourne (talkcontribs) 00:55, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

This should help Help:Template#Creating and editing templates. Please sign your comments with four tildes ~~~~ so we know who you are. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:59, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@MetroManMelbourne: See Help:Template. But if you tell us what you're trying to use it for, there may be an existing template for it. RudolfRed (talk) 01:01, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Linking to "Year in XXXX" articles when giving years

Hi. Back when I first started editing, I was doing a bit of work on film articles. I had noticed that in some articles when there was a statement in the lead along the lines, "Professional Sweetheart is a 1933 American pre-Code romantic comedy …" was written "Professional Sweetheart is a 1933 American pre-Code romantic comedy …", where the year of the film release was linked to "xxxx in film". I thought it was a neat thing and began to do it in some of the film articles I created. However, shortly after I started doing this (and I can't remember when it was, and can't find the particular articles affected), I began to have those "xxxx in film" links removed, and I think I remember that there was a policy/guideline referenced. I also use the standardizing date tool, to harmonize the way dates appear through an article. When using that tool, not only does it standardize dmy or mdy, but it also removes links to "xxxx in yyyy" links. Another editor has taken offense that that has occurred, as at WOWI. Am I misremembering, or is there a guideline regarding this? I can't believe the tool would do this automatically unless there were a guidleline.Onel5969 TT me 23:29, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

WP:DATELINK would be the appropriate guideline. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:22, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks NinjaRobotPirate - I looked at that, but it's not clear that you shouldn't link like I describe above. In fact, the 4th bullet, "1787 in science might be linked from a passage discussing a particular development in the metric system which occurred in that year" might be interpreted as to endorse the practice of linking to "xxxx in yyyy", since the creation of a film might be seen as a "particular development" for that year.Onel5969 TT me 00:34, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Never mind, NinjaRobotPirate, sometimes can't see the forest for the trees. Onel5969 TT me 01:28, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Archiving Closed Discussions

I have saw the talk pages of many article flooded by various closed discussions that have been lying there from years. Should i archive those discussions? I haven't saw any provision for doing so but i think this can help in organizing and updating the talk pages making them more informative and accurate. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Levent Heitmeier! You can archive talk pages according to the instructions at H:ARC. Feel free to archive the talk page you wish to organize. Thanks, –eggofreason(talk · contribs) 17:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, please follow those instructions rather than doing this, Levent Heitmeier. I think the templates you added in those edits are rather intended for closing discussions on noticeboards. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:27, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
I got what i wanted. Thanks both of you. Levent Heitmeier (talk) 17:55, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
@Levent Heitmeier: For talk pages that don't get lots of activity - and therefore aren't hugely long - I would prefer editors NOT to archive old messages, but simply to leave them there for all to see without needing further mouseclicks to find out whether archives contain anything worthwhile or not. It might look nice and tidy, but an empty talk page with an archive full of very old messages is far less helpful than a talk page which clearly shows (in one quick view) that there has been no recent activity. That's my take on things, anyway, and I'd prefer to see editors focusing on more useful tasks. (Oops - that sounded far sharper than I intended it to be, sorry!) Nick Moyes (talk) 18:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Levent Heitmeier, I undid your closure of this section here. Excepting threads that have become disruptive or are clearly off-topic, we do not close discussions here. Further, there is seldom any reason to close any talk page discussions. The only talk page discussions that need to be closed are RfCs, and that is much better left to administrators or highly experienced editors. Archiving and closing are separate, mostly unrelated, topics. Please do not close talk page discussions. John from Idegon (talk) 19:24, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Levent Heitmeier Also, do not delete content at Talk pages, as you did at Talk:Petr Čech. If you do not understand someone's intent, ask, either at the Talk or at their Talk. David notMD (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Nick Moyes John from Idegon Thanks for telling but I'd understood with the help of EggOfReason way before. I didn't knew about it that's why I asked it here and I ask several questions here. But some guys intend like if they knew all this way before joining wikipedia. David notMD Maybe, the experienced guys like you may decipher what is the intent of this IP here, Special: diff/891091990 and yes, I should have discussed it on the IP's talk page which probably belongs to the same person even after 9 years.
I already confessed my apology by asking the question here and that if I did a mistake. If I get even a trace of doubt about one of my edits in my mind, I rush here to ask you all and if I had done wrong, I revert it by myself. The tone of my language may have hurt some peoples for which I am really sorry and ready to take any punishment but this was only intended to tell the other editors to be careful with the way they are talking to a new editor or even anyone. This is the sole reason of all the disputes on this site. My reason to join this is that Jimbo Wales is a genius to have created such a democratic platform for online education and it is yours duty, you the administrators to maintain civility here not the new and foolish guys like me. Many peoples do see me and will see me as an arrogant person here because i reply to only a chosen few and those peoples know about it but this is done by me to avoid any kind of trash talk. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 01:25, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
My comment, earlier today, to not delete content at Talk pages, was instructional, not chastising. I believe the same intent from Nick Moyes and John from Idegon, in recommending that you do not archive article Talk pages and do not close discussions. No punishment intended (nor administered). David notMD (talk) 02:08, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Warren Brown Sailor Bermuda

There is a biography or sorts on Warren but IMO, is lacking. I worked in Bermuda from September 1954 until September 1956 as a pharmacist in the Medical Hall, owned by Gibbons. My oldest son was born in the old hospital on Jan. 4th 1955 and his mother shared a room with Ann Brown, Warren's wife who also had their first born son the same day. The two women chatted, Ann telling how she had married into a sailing family, Archie Brown her father-in-law and his son, Warren. My wife said that I sailed which was true, small boats In Windsor, Ontario. Ann said "that is interesting, Warren and his dad need a new crew member" and the next day I was phoned while at work by Warren and told to be at the R.B.Y.C. warf by 1 PM the coming Thursday. I went, was rowed out to Warbaby ll and was welcomed aboard by Warren and his father Archie who was helmsman. Warren and another handled the foresails and I was put in charge of the main. The 5th crewmember was for the foredeck man for the balloon spinacker. I crewed for them weekly for 18 months in the races of a fleet of 10 boats in the International One Design class.

My concern is that in the bio on Warren, it states that it lacks information. Well, one of the references is from The Royal Gazette of which I printed out in it's entirety. Warren died on Christmas Day 2014.This obit is an excellent compilation of his lifetime achievements. What really bothers me is that my 2nd wife and I were in Bermuda in October that year and I tried so hard to phone him during the three days we were in the islands, to no avail. This was 56 years after my two year contract with Gibbons. I am two years older then Warren.

So, my question is would it be possible for Wikipedia to obtain permission from The Royal Gazette to print their obit in full, with the two authors named?

Sincerely,

Don Bartlett, Ottawa, Ont. Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slower Old Fox (talkcontribs) 20:05, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Courtesy link to article: Warren Brown (sailor) --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Slower Old Fox. No, Wikipedia does not reprint obituaries in full or any other article published elsewhere in full. Instead, editors summarize those sources in our own words. No permission is needed from the newspaper. Brief attributed quotations are allowed. As for the author's names, you can add them to the refererence. Your personal experiences are interesting and useful if they motivate you to help improve the encyclopedia. But you cannot add your personal experiences to Wikipedia articles. That is contrary to our policy against original research. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:51, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Questions need Answers

Questions: 1. What is teahouse for? 2. What you can do inside? 3. uhh...how do your edit? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infinity80836 (talkcontribs) 01:41, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Teahouse is for asking questions about how to do Wikipedia editing stuff. Like maybe how to create a reference. As for editing, every article has sections with "edit" Clicking on that opens the section for changes. Sometimes one editor makes a change and another editor reverses/reverts it. Happens to everyone. Sometimes you are right, sometimes the other editor is right. If you feel strongly about it, proper next step is to go to Talk page of the article and provide the reasons for your changes. A good place for new editors to start is to find an article about a topic you have good knowledge about. Important to know that edits require references. Your knowing something to be true does not count. David notMD (talk) 02:16, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@Infinity80836: If you want to learn about how to write good articles, I recommend our training programme at The Wikipedia Adventure. And of course if you have further questions, you can always come back to the Teahouse and ask - I do.--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:51, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Success

What factors has made Wikipedia the greatest encyclopedia ever created in human history?

97.90.47.253 (talk) 03:48, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

@97.90.47.253: Editors like you! Smile.gif --Gronk Oz (talk) 03:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
You may like to read this. Project:Why Wikipedia is so great. – Ammarpad (talk) 07:13, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
It isn't! Or rather, it depends on your definition of "greatest". It is the largest, certainly. --bonadea contributions talk 07:24, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Article about Toyopet automobiles appears to be incorrect

There are numerous Toyopet dealers currently operating in Japan. I saw the one in Sapporo. If you want to see it go to Google maps and enter Toyopet dealer, Sapporo, Japan. The are others in many locations in Japan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.87.231 (talk) 20:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

‹The template MoreInfo is being considered for merging.›  Additional information needed Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for taking the trouble to make your observation. Unfortunately, you didn't provide link to a specific article, and there are many of them, so I can't really see what we can do. Normally, we advise making suggestions about improving an article on the talk page of that article, as Teahouse hosts aren't responsible for changing article content (unless they want to, of course). But in this case I'm not even sure what you'd actually like to see corrected? As Toyopet appears to be synonymous with Toyota -a Japanese brand - I would certainly expect there to be innumerable dealers operating in Japan. Have you read an article that says there aren't? Maybe you've encountered some vandalism that needs correcting. Again, please supply a link to the article in question for us to check. Regards from the UK (where I'm just down the road from Toyota's main car manufacturing plant near Derby) Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
MrDolomite and Malcolma This is a great opportunity for you both. I think you should try to have a look at that toyopet article or whatever and try to fix it by involving a Japanese. From a universal servant Levent Heitmeier (talk) 01:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
There are many redirects from Toyopet to Toyota, directly for the brand itself (ToyopetToyota) and for specific models (e.g. Toyopet TiaraToyota Corona), which indicates Toyopet is not an independent entity. And I can't see how the existence of some dealer of such global brand might make any Article about Toyopet automobile incorrect. --CiaPan (talk) 09:12, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Help me, please

Hello everybody. Please help me to transfer this Draft page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Eldaniz_Mammadov) into the Article page... I can't do it. Sorry. Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viki-BSU (talkcontribs) 10:37, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Viki-BSU welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid it would be a very bad idea to move Draft:Eldaniz Mammadov into the main part of Wikipedia at this time. Notwithstanding the completely wrong use of capital letters in headings and inline hyperlinks to external pages in the body of the article, the page itself fails to explain why this part-time librarian with a PhD is worthy of an article on this encyclopaedia. LinkedIn maybe, but not here. Please read this policy which explains the essential criterion of "Notability" which must be reached if an article is to go into, or remain in, the main part of Wikipedia. If you can make the article demonstrate his notability, we'll be glad to help you. Generally, we recommend that new editors use the Articles for Creation process to submit drafts for review. Please sign all future posts with four tildes (~~~~) right at the very end of your post so we know who is saying what. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:16, 6 April 2019 (UTC)    

Coral Restoration Foundation article - questions regarding declination by Liance

Hello,

My question is: Would my Coral Restoration Foundation stub article be acceptable if I merely upgrade the references to an acceptable level. Or, do I need to upgrade the article in additional ways? If so, what more needs to be done?

Thanks!

FLkeyseditor (talk) 12:19, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

The first thing you need to do is to remove the wording copied from material previously published elsewhere. Copyright violation is not permitted, so you need to use your own words. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:38, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi FLkeyseditor. If you're asking about User:FLkeyseditor/sandbox, then you might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for reference. The first page is just an essay, but it might contain some insights into writing article about organizations like the Coral Restoration Foundation. The second, however, is basically going to determine whether the draft you're writing is ultimately going to be accepted by an AfC reviewer, even as a stub. Only subjects deemed to be Wikipedia:Notable are generally deemed appropriate to have an article written about them and exceptions to this aren't really made for WP:STUBs. So, your mission if you should choose to accept it is to find significant coverage in reliable sources which show that the organization at least meets relevant Wikipedia notability guidelines. Once you think you've found them, then look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners for some general tips on how to write an article and add citations to an article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:47, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@FLkeyseditor: I think it would be far, far better to create a new section on "Conservation action" in the article on Florida Reef. In fact, I'm actually quite stunned how paltry the mention of conservation is in that article. Your draft is nowhere near suitable as a standalone article at this time, and you would need more sources to meet Notability criteria, but it would be quite OK to include mention of conservation work or link to published biodiversity action plans etc, as per the Washington Post article you cited. Thus, a link to the CRF would be OK, but it must be non-promotional and based only on what reliable sources describe the CRF and NGOs and government agencies are doing, rather than just regurgitate self-published statements of conservation priorities. Hope this helps. If in doubt what to do, you could post a proposal on the talk page on the Florida Reef article although I should declare that I have just posted a suggestion to that effect on its talk page already. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:18, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

What's up with this article?

What's up with this article? If the usage of "bibliography" is the same as what I'm used to hearing, these are either sources to the painter linked in the article or some other kind of list. Clovermoss (talk) 03:56, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

It appears to be a list of books about Artemisia Gentileschi. (Side note: looks like this sort of page is more commonly titled "Bibliography of" than "Bibliography on".) Eman235/talk 07:23, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Worth reading is Wikipedia:Lists. Lists are a specific and valid type of Wikipedia article. Lists are also appropriate in many cases as sections within general articles. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:53, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
@Cullen328:@Eman235: Thank you. I've never seen an article like that before, so I thought I'd ask. :) To clarfy, I've seen lists before, just not bibliography articles. Still, Wikipedia:Lists looks interesting. Clovermoss (talk) 15:04, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Requesting an edit on the special page User group rights

Hi, I found some duplicate data on this page: |User group rights.
The group "Autoconfirmed users" is the same as the group "Confirmed users".
They both have the same content, and I don't know how to edit that page, so I was wondering if someone could do something about it, Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M-ahmadi1989 (talkcontribs) 12:57, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

Though the rights are effectively the same, the groups are not the same. Members can be added manually to the group "Confirmed users". Try following the links from the "Group" column to WP:CONFIRM. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
In addition to the answer above, the page is generated automatically by the software according to how the groups are defined, so it cannot be edited. – Ammarpad (talk) 15:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)