Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 178

Archive 175

Archive 176

Archive 177

Archive 178

Archive 179

Archive 180

→

Archive 185

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Kush

At https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_Kush I added the word Hindu to show that that Persian word for that mountain range comes from 'Hindu' and 'Kush', in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_kush#Origin_of_name section, but someone is reverting/undoing it. How do I get someone to resolve that dispute/arbitrate?—Khabboos (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Every article has an associated talk page where editors are encouraged to discuss improvements to the article. The best thing to do initially is calmly and politely explain your position at Talk:Hindu Kush. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 16:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, you should click 'view history' at the top of the article on Hindu Kush ... that will let you see the edit-summary that the person who reverted left, and whether it is one person, or more than one. Sometimes people don't leave edit-summaries, which is a bit annoying, but often they will give a reason for their revert. See also, WP:BRD which explains the usual process... when you inserted the change you were being properly WP:BOLD, and then someone decided to revert you for some reason, and now you are in the discuss phase. Feel free to drop back into the teahouse, if you need help with getting the finer points of the discussion ironed out, or whatever. Thanks for improving wikipedia, Khabboos, see you around. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

One AcidSnow is still reverting it - he probably wants us to avoid using the term 'muslim'. What should we do if the problem persists?—Khabboos (talk) 16:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

"he probably wants", are you being serous? You have already been told that "Muslim enslavers" is non-neutral. None of the sources even say Muslims nor give a period of history when the term began to be used. Could you also please not change quotes? AcidSnow (talk) 17:33, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Page Curation Question

Is there a way to see how many pages you have curated? Or is there a userbox to display this? Science Saturdays (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

• Hello Science Saturdays and welcome to the Teahouse! I would say that is a very good question! I personally do not know the answer, but I'm guessing that Kudpung does. Hopefully he will be able to speedily respond. :) Technical 13 (talk) 17:39, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Science Saturdays, you may find your Page Curation Log useful for this? ~ benzband (talk) 18:18, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Reference list

How do I create a reference list at the bottom of a Wiki page? Thanks! Mademoiselle Q (talk) 19:53, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour, Mademoiselle Q. Start by putting all of your references in the actual text of the article, at the points where you want the citations to appear. Next, enclose all of them between <ref> and </ref> tags (note the backslash in that second one). Finally, create a section at the bottom of your artilce called "References", and put in it the template code {{Reflist}}. Job done. See this essay and this page for more information. Bon chance! Yunshui 雲‍水 20:05, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you – have a wonderful weekend! Mademoiselle Q (talk) 20:19, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

How to update information without getting vandalized

Hi -- I work for a corporate and have repeated tried to update our entry to include our new (as of 2005)logo and to update some out-of-date "controversial" information about a long-resolved lawsuit. SPACKlick keeps undoing my edits.

How do I provide substantiated resources to make the changes?(I tried citing our 10-k filed with the SEC)Does an inaccurate, incomplete newspaper article override official corporate documents? AND how do I delte the entry entirely since it is so outdated and inaccurate and I am precluded from providing any updates? Someone from my company did not make the entry in the first place. Thanks for any advise you can provide.

199.96.16.11 (talk) 21:23, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi there. Before reading the rest of my reply please read Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines which detail why it isn't a good idea to edit an article with which you are affiliated.

Now to clarify a few things, first being that your information was not vandalised. Another, experienced, editor reverted your changes because you removed sourced content without much in the way of explanation. All content on wikipedia must be sourced to reliable independent sources so that the reader knows it is true. We simply can't take people's word for it that any information is false, especially so when the person claiming it to be false is affiliated with the subject of the article. It would be very easy for someone to come along and say 'I never did any of those bad things in my article' regardless of whether they happened otherwise. Second, no one owns any article. This means that your company doesn't own it, and it cannot be deleted unless under one of Wikipedia's deletion rules regarding the article itself; not simply a request for deletion.

If you want to update the article please provide - on the talk page for that article - reliable (news articles, books, etc.) independent (not press releases or things written by the company) sources which discuss the new information. Samwalton9 (talk) 23:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

If I quote an external source 10 times, does it have to appear 10 times in the notes?

I quoted twice ^ Pierre Schapira. "Masaki Kashiwara and Algebraic Analysis" in Masaki Kashiwara can I do it in such a way that it will not occur twice in the notes?85.139.132.194 (talk) 12:09, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, and I have done so for you. You can do it by using <ref name="name"></ref> the first time you use a specific reference, and then <ref name="name" /> (the nowiki-tags around both cases are just to make it display as it should, they should not be copied into the article) for any further occurrences in the article. "name" can of course be replaced by anything, except for pure numerals (I have used the author's name in the case of the article you were speaking of) and must have double quotations ("...") if the refname has a space in it. See also WP:REFNAME, it's a bit more in-depth. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Easier way to add archiveurls

Hi! I like to add archived versions of Internet references to prevent link rot. Is there an easier way to do this instead of adding archiveurl= and archivedate= to each reference that I archive?

Thanks, Bananasoldier (talk) 03:49, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. I personally think {{cite web|archiveurl=|archivedate=}} is easy enough, but what alternative do you have in mind? the RefToolbar is an alternative. (You'll need to click "Show extra fields", though.) You could suggest it another alternative here or possibly at Help talk:Citation Style 1 (Citation Style 1 being the citation method that employs {{cite web}} and others). --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 05:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh, oops, didn't see that. Thank you for your time, Bananasoldier (talk) 15:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Well, what I had in mind was using a tool like Checklinks, which I found here, to add archived versions, but I'm not sure how to use this tool. Bananasoldier (talk) 15:12, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

How do you update a outdated logo on a page 67.231.54.241 (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

OUr logo has been updated and the old one is displaying on the page. How do you update a outdated logo on a page? Is there a way to upload the photo? 67.231.54.241 (talk) 16:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

To do it yourself, create an account, wait four days making at least ten productive edits in that time, and follow the procedures regarding non free content to the letter. If you give the name of the article and a link to the new logo, an experienced editor here may assist you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:31, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

These red links should be blue, which is making me blue...

I uploaded a photo that includes several men with Wikipedia biographies... all things in red should be live links to existing articles, and I don't know what I did wrong. The names are as they appear on the articles... I am stumped. Thank you much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HUPSF_Lampoon_Folder1_Image3_1885.pdf

I have placed this image on the biography of Thomas Parker Sanborn and plan to use it on the Lampoon article as well. Thanks. Kathrynklos (talk) 20:30, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

The links on File:HUPSF_Lampoon_Folder1_Image3_1885.pdf are red because the description there is a copy of the page at Wikimedia Commons. The links are trying to look for articles on the same wiki that it is written at, but Commons doesn't have articles (though William Randolph Hearst links to a gallery of images someone has curated). Therefore the links are red. To make these links on Commons link to the associated articles on the English Wikipedia, edit the description page there and use a piped link such as [[:en:The Harvard Lampoon|The Harvard Lampoon]]. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 20:40, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello LukeSurl the images are at Wiki-Commons this means you need to use the parameter w: to the linked them to link to Wikipedia... like [[w:The Harvard Lampoon|The Harvard Lampoon]]. See this edit to see what I did. -- Moxy (talk) 20:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you all! Kathrynklos (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm trying to create a wikilink to a page I know exists (Knowledge Translation) but in my preview it shows up red, and says it doesn't exist. Will it go blue when I save my changes?

BlazewareBlazeware (talk) 15:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Knowledge Translation looks blue to me, but Knowledge translation doesn't - Are you using capitals or mixed case? Arjayay (talk) 15:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm using non caps in my text and the wiki page I'm referring to does use title caps - but I don't want to use title caps in my referring text - what should I do? Blazeware (talk) 17:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The article title should have been in sentence case, so I have moved it from Knowledge Translation to Knowledge translation (with a redirect remaining from the old title). If I had not done that, you could have used a piped link; [[Knowledge Translation|Knowledge translation]] displays as Knowledge translation but points to Knowledge Translation. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

ok thanks - I've got it.Blazeware (talk) 18:21, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Hinduism in Pakistan

I added two references from reputed Pakistani newspapers at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Pakistan but it has been removed. If discussion on the Talk page doesn't help what should I do next?—Khabboos (talk) 16:25, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Khabboos, and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't tell for sure why AcidSnow removed your addition, but my guess is that AcidSnow first removed the 2005 citation as not relevant to discussing the current state (they left your 2014 citation in); and then removed the claim because the citation does not back it up. The article in question is talking about attacks on minorities in Pakistan, not specifically Hindus; and in fact refers to two attacks on Churches within the last few months. Therefore your wording "Hindus are still targeted and persecuted in Pakistan today", while strictly true, is a misrepresentation of what the cited article states: it is rather your conclusion from the article, which is forbidden under Wikipedia's rules on original research. But I urge you to discuss the matter with AcidSnow on their talk page, and try to reach agreement. I reformatted your link in the title above as a Wikilink, rather than a URL --ColinFine (talk) 16:53, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

ColinFine, you have hit the nail on the head. You have stated every single reason for my removal of those statements. Also, Khabboos, could you please stop making multiple topics about the same thing? AcidSnow (talk) 20:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

The Musketeers (2014 TV series)

Hi, given that each episode of this series receives a fair few million, is it worth an article for each episode? Thanks, Matty.007 19:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I think I agree, unless the line that says " ...of ten parts... " on the summary paragraph is the same as episodes, else give each part an article. My POV. Emekadavid (talk) 21:00, 31 January 2014 (UTC)