Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 917

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 910

←

Archive 915

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.

–84.46.53.245 (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.) –84.46.53.245 (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. –84.46.53.245 (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 (talk • contribs) 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 (talk • contribs) 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 (talk • contribs) 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 (talk • contribs) 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 (talk • contribs) 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)

Disambiguation

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 https://montsame.mn/en/read/130768 as a suggestion that the Order actually exists). However, there is a page for the Swedish Order of the Polar Star already, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Polar_Star. 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) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/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 (talk • contribs) 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". –84.46.53.245 (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 (talk • contribs)

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: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Susan_Watkins

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 (talk • contribs) 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:

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). Tigraan^{Click 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. Tigraan^{Click 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).