Misplaced Pages

Sorry but how do you get those straight speech marks while editing? I can't get them. It's okay I've got them now (Shift+2.)Rubbish computer (talk) 16:46, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

(e/c) @Rubbish computer: Hmm. When you use your keyboard to type them in the usual manner (shift and then the key next to enter) they are automatically rendered as smart quotes? Is so, that must be some program/setting operating on your computer. Never seen that before but if you're using a Mac with Maverick, I just found this One other possibility. Many word processing programs are set to autocorrect dumb quotes to smart quotes. Are you typing this in a word processing program first as a draft and then pasting? If so, there's the problem, which you would have to fix by either turning off that autocorrect feature, fixing the quotes after pasting them, or by stopping using it. Anyway, if none of this is useful, tell us what OS you're using; whether you have any programs that are set to change the appearance of type; anything else you might think relevant.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I had this problem when using someone else's computer (rather rude to change their settings), but overcome it by using the symbols menu at the bottom of the edit window (which I only normally use to get the right Em-dash/En-dash), rather than using the keyboard - Arjayay (talk) 18:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Adding a term.

We in the aquatic community are all familiar with the term "Hookless Fishing" which is used for the undamaged capture of live specimens, either for bait (sorry) or research ( sorry again) or aquarium trade ( probably a third sorry!) This does not detract from the existance of the term but I am not very computer literate and would like some help in getting this term placed in Misplaced Pages. I do feel confident enough to fill out the description once the term has been set up. Can anybody help?

IFOCAS 86.167.20.252 (talk) 15:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, IFOCAS. There are two questions you (or somebody) need to answer: First, is there more than a paragraph or two that can be written about this? Misplaced Pages is an encyclopaedia, not a dictionary, so articles are expected to be more than just a definition. Secondly, but more importantly, are there enough published sources on which such an article can be based? Pretty well every single piece of information, and absolutely every opinion, judgment, argument or conclusion, should be based strictly on what somebody has already written, and published in a reliable source (such as a major newspaper, or a book from a reputable publisher - not usually a blog or social networking site). If you can find suitable sources (which don't have to be online, by the way, but must be published), then you are welcome to have a go at writing an article - I suggest you start with your first article, and use the article wizard to create your draft in a place where you are free to work on it and to request a review when you think it is ready. --ColinFine (talk) 21:02, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

New page, rookie problems, notability?

I'm new, and I don't want to ruffle feathers or get my page deleted. I posted a page about a private school in MD, but then received notice it had "notability" issues. I guess the problem I have is that based on the "notability" of its public school peers etc. it would be moreso. 1. Is there a standard that has to be met or the page will be deleted? 2. Who decides notability finally? 3. What is the difference between "sources" and "external links"? I can prove that the school exists (Maryland State Department of Education). I can use a local magazine as well. Do pictures help this? brianmarkzockolljr (did I sign that right?) Brianmarkzockolljr (talk) 14:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, @Brianmarkzockolljr:, and welcome to the Teahouse. I presume this question relates to Faith Baptist School (Salisbury, Maryland). In Misplaced Pages (WP), the term "notability" is used with a quite specific meaning that is a bit different from the outside world. Not every school (or person or company or anything else) warrants its own article in an encyclopedia, and "notability" is the term for this in WP. And it is not directly to do with how "important" the subject is; rather it has to do with showing that the topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The general concept is explained in detail at Misplaced Pages:Notability, and there are more specific criteria for organizations (including schools) at WP:ORG. So your job is to collect independent coverage of the school: not what the school community says about itself, but what others say about it. The article already has some references where students have made the press, which is a great start. It would be good to find independent coverage of the school itself. A good starting place for your search is the list of resources at the bottom of the "Notability" tag that was placed on the page. That "Notability" tag gives you time to work on this - it won't be deleted straight away because of that notice. "References" are the verifiable sources that support statements made in the article, and the article currently seems to be using those correctly - it just needs more of them, especially to good quality independent coverage. A few "External links" are allowed to supplement the article with links to things like the school's official Web site, and again the article seems to have that right. I hope that is enough to point you in the right direction; please feel free to come back to the Teahouse if you have more questions.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:08, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Twinkle mobile

Is there any way to revert vandalism using twinkle on mobile? Because it irks me to see edits I cannot revert. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

If your mobile browser supports JavaScript, then you should be able to use Twinkle. If you can't use Twinkle on a mobile browser, try checking the settings to see if JavaScript is enabled. Esquivalience 14:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Redirect page question

Need some help. Stumbled upon random article (Inge Keller). Said in article her name was actually Ingeborg Keller, so I made that redirect page. Then dug a bit deeper, realized it's probably not her name, so decided to revert my good intentions by deleting the redirect page. Read about how to do it on Misplaced Pages:Redirect, but don't understand anything now. Need some help without messing up more than necessary. Assistance, please! Kadmium (talk) 11:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Kadmium. Since you, technically speaking, created a new page, you can't undo that creation without the use of the deletion tool, which is only available to administrators. If you want to request an admin delete a page you created you can use one of the templates found at WP:G7 to ask that the page be speedily deleted. I'm taking this post to be an express wish to have the page deleted so I've done that for you anyway. Sam Walton (talk) 11:15, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Great! Thanks a lot. Kadmium (talk) 11:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Mispelling - Instructions for editors

Bonjour from France. A couple of questions about the instructions for editors. The page says "For correct spellings not appropriate for Wiktionary, add {{proper name}} around it if it's a proper noun; otherwise add {{not a typo}} around it (for example, nonsense series of letters used as examples in puzzles or computer code).

I found a page with the word "wishstone", which in the context is a proper name, so I edited to read Template:Proper name Wishstone. Is that a correct edit?

There were 3 such entries on the same page. I changed all 3 (as above). Was that correct, or did I only need to change the first entry on the page?

Thank you in anticipation.

Kaphoen (talk) 09:36, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

• Bonjour Kaphoen welcome to Misplaced Pages and the Teahouse. To use the {{Proper name}} template see Template:Not a typo (redirected from Template:Proper name). Also in general for any template just search for Template colon template name to find the template details. Like most templates parameters are divided by a pipe |. So in this case it would be {{Proper name|Wishstone}} which gives Wishstone not {{Proper name Wishstone}} which gives Template:Proper name Wishstone. — Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 10:11, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
• Bonjour Kaphoen, I corrected the usage on 11th Cat and also reverted your change to 110 in the Shade as the spelling mistakes were parts of the quotes. As there is no reference the source of the quotes are unclear but could have been from the written script, or used to indicate the way the text is actually performed in the play. In general quotations should only be spell checked against the source and not correct spelling. Other places to be careful when spell checking are titles (i.e. books, plays, shows, music, ...) and file names — All the best KylieTastic (talk) 10:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

The template tags in your question weren't displaying, so I surrounded them with <nowiki> tags. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:36, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

You quoted instructions from Misplaced Pages:Typo Team/moss#Instructions for editors: "For correct spellings not appropriate for Wiktionary, add {{proper name}} around it if it's a proper noun; otherwise add {{not a typo}} around it".

Note that blue/purple text is links. When you see a link in curly braces like {{proper name}}, the link goes to a template page which usually has usage instructions. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Page Patrolled

Hello , Is it good when you get an alert- your page was patrolled ? Or is it bad ? if good - should thank the patroller ? Thank youOptrimes (talk) 09:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Optrimes and welcome to the Teahouse. It's a good thing. Patrollers check new pages just to make sure they are consistent with Misplaced Pages's policies, and they are the front line of defence to prevent Misplaced Pages being hijacked by spammers, etc. So if they marked your page as patrolled, it simply means they took a look at it and said it is okay. For more information, look at Misplaced Pages:Patrols.--Gronk Oz (talk) 09:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Thank you , will thank patroller too.Optrimes (talk) 09:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Page delted after 1 day

I have created one page and added some basic information into it but now it says This page has been deleted. The deletion and move log for the page are provided below for reference. So much confused, i have also contacted my institute and told them that i have created our page in Misplaced Pages, now it is deleted, so embracing situation for us.

User interface is so confusing and old layout, It is very bad site for new comers and not helpful at all Eirenaios (talk) 08:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, my friend. Sit down and have a cup of tea. Don't be discouraged; we are all here to help you. You are talking about G K Bharad Institute of Engineering, right? Well, first thing is — you should not be writing an article about an institution with which you are closely affiliated. Try to write or edit some articles about other subjects in which you are interested, just to get the hang of editing here. One does not jump off a diving board before one can swim. Just go through the encyclopedia and choose some articles to improve. That would be a good first start. Also, look at the links that some other kind editors put on your talk page here. Did you see them? They should be helpful to you. And come back here to the Teahouse with more questions. Good luck! GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:39, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Good afternoon! I'm the admin who hit the delete button and I apologise for hitting the delete button so quickly. I've temporarily restored this article. Basically the article needs to cite a few independent external sources in order to stay on Misplaced Pages. For an example of how it's done, see the "Notes" section on Oriel College, Oxford which is a featured article. Deryck C. 12:29, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

wikipolicy

i saw recent talk at chairman page about name of page. can helpful person humbly help explain difference of policy and guidelines and essay? confused... Togashi Yuuta (talk) 06:44, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The differences are explained at Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines#Role. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:12, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Edit request for Sophie Hunter page

There is a one-sentence paragraph in Hunter's lead that could be easily merged with the first. There is no reason for it to be separate from the main one. Please be so kind to merge them please. Thank you! 180.191.69.3 (talk) 01:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse. Your request has already been fulfilled by Meatsgains. However, it would be better to put the {{edit semi-protected}} tag on the talk page of the page, accompanied by the details of the request, instead of placing the request on multiple user's talk pages (which may cause confusion if one user has already fulfilled the request). Nonetheless, thanks for your contributions to Misplaced Pages and you may want to consider creating an account. After four days and ten edits, you will be able to edit semi-protected (silver padlock) pages. Good luck! Esquivalience 04:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Unclear Citation Style

I posted a new article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/Patrik_Giardino. There is a box on the top of the page that says "This article has an unclear citation style." I'm not sure how to rectify it. How can I get more experienced editors to fix and add to this article? Thank you.104.172.230.4 (talk) 23:27, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I recommend trying your hand at fixing the references yourself. The main problem is that the references are in a list at the end, instead of in footnotes. Help:Referencing for beginners provides instructions about how to create footnotes. Please post again here if you're having problems figuring it out! Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:33, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, Calliopejen1. When I need help with putting my references and citations in the proper format I go to this helpful Misplaced Pages page: WP:Copyedit . This is homebase for group of Wikipedians and who love to help people and editors with problems like yours. There's a place there where you can put in a request for their assistance.

  Bfpage |leave a message  01:33, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Can you cite same link several times

I recently cited the same reference several times on Drunk driving law by country. The reference contained the necessary information for both points. Should a link only be cited once?Rubbish computer (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Rubbish computer hello and welcome to The Teahouse. For each reference you use more than once, choose an appropriate name. For this example we'll call it "name1", "name2", etc., but you should use something descriptive. For one use of each reference you want to use several times, replace "<ref>" with <ref name="name1">. For all other uses of that reference, use <ref name="Name1"/> to replace the entire reference. You must have "/" at the end for the other uses. For another reference, use <ref name="name2"> and <ref name="name2"/>, and so on.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Rubbish computer. Vchimpanzee is exactly right: give it a name the first time you use it, and thereafter just refer to that name. You can see this described in more detail, with examples, at Help:Referencing_for_beginners#Same_reference_used_more_than_once.--Gronk Oz (talk) 02:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.Rubbish computer (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, Rubbish computer. Just to clarify a small point of Gronk Oz's wording: "give it a name the first time you use it" doesn't mean that the name has to be assigned on the earliest use in the article. It can be on any of them, as I've discovered. It's just that it makes most sense to name the reference as soon as you use it, and from then on just use the name. --Thnidu (talk) 05:24, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you.Rubbish computer (talk) 08:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Experienced editor

What defines an experienced editor? I have done a range of different types of edits and created some good articles and was wondering if I could do more. But I have not made the required amount of edits or been a Misplaced Pages editor for longer enough. So was just going to ask what 'privileges' do 'experienced' editors do? thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Wrightie99: If you go by Misplaced Pages:Service awards, an "experienced editor" has at least 6,000 edits and has been on Misplaced Pages for at least 1.5 years. --AmaryllisGardener 21:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

And there are no extra privileges that are based on length of service or number of edits. --NeilN 21:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Just to add to what has been said above, there are sooo many things you can do to here that does not require any extra 'privileges' at all. Start by reading up on the Misplaced Pages policy and you will find many areas that you can help in. And remember that having 'privileges' here on the Misplaced Pages usually means that you have to clean up messes, sort out conficts and do all kinds of not so pleasant work. There is a reason that the sign of an administrator is a cleaning mop. The only reward and 'privileges' for good work here is more work. ;) w.carter-Talk 21:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Experienced users do have the privilege of knowing things that their experience has taught them. Unfortunately, my experience has apparently failed to teach me enough to avoid tautological nattering.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Wrightie99: Here at the English Misplaced Pages you have the same automatic user rights as more experienced editors as soon as you are autoconfirmed (at least 4 days and 10 edits). Manually assigned user rights are made on an individual basis and not determined by edit count although it may be a factor in decisions. Some elections have specific requirements. Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2014#Election process said "at least 150 mainspace edits". meta:Stewards/Elections 2015/Guidelines#Voters says "at least 600 edits", so you are short with your current 443. meta:Wikimedia Foundation elections 2013#Requirements said "at least 300 edits", so maybe you can vote in the 2015 board elections. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all the feedback and answers, I understand now. Before I assumed you were either new or experienced, didn't know there were so many ranks if you like. thanks again Wrightie99 (talk) 23:58, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Good question, @Wrightie99: I would like to add my two cents to the fine answers above: be cautious in using the edit count to guage how experienced somebody is. One editor can spend a huge amount of time researching and writing a single well-crafted article, while another editor spends the same time correcting spelling mistakes on perhaps hundreds of articles. Both are performing a worthwhile service and building a better Misplaced Pages, but their edit count stats would look very different. See the article on Editcountitis for more on this.--Gronk Oz (talk) 02:40, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Where should I discuss major changes to an article?

Hello, Teahouse! I have been working on revising the Biotechnology article. My (currently incomplete) revision is in my sandbox. I assume it is not acceptable to simply replace the existing article with my version. My question is: What should I do to inform other Wikipedians that I have prepared an improved version and want to invite discussion and peer-review? Any help is both greatly appreciated and sorely needed. Denny1213 (talk) 20:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Denny1213, you can bring all of this to the attention of other editors on the article's talk page. On the same page you will also find the projects that the article belongs to, post alerts there, and as you said there is also the Misplaced Pages:Peer review where you can make a request. Even though Misplaced Pages encourage editors to be bold, in this case a cautious approach, as you say, is probably best since the article is a level 3 vital article. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The difficulty with replacing large sections of (or all of) the text, is that it becomes a "spot the difference" competition - editors can be suspicious that you are trying to hide changes, and may reject the entire change as they disagree with a small part of it, which cannot easily be isolated.
Large changes make it difficult for you to explain why you feel any particular change is necessary, whereas incremental changes allow such raison d'etre.
Furthermore, you admit your current version is incomplete, but editors can only comment on, and/or criticize it as it stands - they do not know what is complete/incomplete, which could lead to frustration, by them, or you.
I suggest you propose changes incrementally, explaining why you feel they are necessary, what is wrong with the existing version, and what references you are using to justify the changes, - Arjayay (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your sage advice. I will begin by proposing my changes to the lead section in the article talk page and will proceed from there. Thank you and have a nice weekend! Denny1213 (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

having issues with referencing, have had a couple of rejections due to lack of "validity"

I have tried editing a biography on Xiomara Gonzalez Govea and have been rejected du to referencing....hoping you could suggest some ideas/solutions to get this article published:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Draft:Xiomara_Gonzalez_Govea

64.134.178.114 (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi 64.134.178.114 and welcome to the Teahouse. The article was deleted before I could have a look at it. I have left you links on your talk page, to pages that describe the do and don't in making an acceptable article. Please read them. Especially Misplaced Pages:Your first article. I also strongly suggest that you get an account. There are many benefits with having one that will help you write articles in the future. One of these is your own sandbox where you can experiment all you want and have other editors come and make suggestions before making drafts or articles. Reading the note of the editor who deleted your article it seems like the main problem was copyright. Remember that an article must be written in your own words and not just copied from some internet site. Writing an article is sort of like reading about something in many books or reliable sites online, and later summing this up when you tell your friends about it (that is the article). And when they ask you: "Wow! How did you know this?" You say: "I read it here, here and here" (those are the references). Well, that is the simplified version of it, I'm sure some editors would have another better way of putting it. Happy editing, w.carter-Talk 21:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

And thank you, W.carter, for your nice response. Have a cup of tea. GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:25, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-new editor working on research about Misplaced Pages

I am a graduate student in library and information sciences and a semi-new editor and I am doing a project on Misplaced Pages as an information community. Would anyone be willing to do a brief interview? I will preserve your anonymity.

Thank you! Casswenze (talk) 19:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Casswenze it would probably be helpful to say what form this brief interview would take? i.e. email, skype, phone, via custom website, etc and if you have any conditions (number of edits, how long someone has been an editor, country...) Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 20:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The interview/survey would be through Google Docs and the only condition is that the person has somehow contributed to Misplaced Pages. Casswenze (talk) 21:35, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to contact me, Casswenze. I do not care about anonymity. Cullen Let's discuss it 22:47, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Casswenze, happy to answer a survey. If you need a good cross section of people you'll probably need to just do some random asking on peoples talk pages. Maybe just make a good cut and paste request post with all the details.... run up Special:RecentChanges and random pick people from the last 24 hours. KylieTastic (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
• If there's still a need, I'd be happy to contribute too, anonymous or not. My email is open. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
• Casswenze, Misplaced Pages has been around now 14 years and been the subject of many studies. It might help you to read Wikimedia's Subject Recruitment and other areas of the Research section. There is an interesting monthly Research Newsletter that can keep you updated on the latest Misplaced Pages research projects. Build on the experience of other researchers and, bonus, you can use these studies as references in your own! Good luck~ Liz 01:43, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Butterfly info and categories

Hi I have created and worked on the Bryna (given name) page and need some help putting it in categories and adding the correct stub type. Also for the other page I am trying to work on Bryna I can't find much info regarding that type of butterfly. I will be doing some more research and if you are to busy to help with this small unimportant article I don't blame you. Thanks Hungryce (talk) 18:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Hungryce: I am stealing a moment while at work so hurried note: Found two sources you might use: and . Cheers--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:40, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

You have come to the right place! I am highly active in the Misplaced Pages project Lepidoptera and glad to help you edit and improve more articles on butterflies. I'll take a look at your article as soon as I get my computer working again. For the present time I am communicating on my smart phone and don't have all the editing tools that I need to help you do your best editing job.

Barbara Page

Thanks I started working on the Bryna page as a joke but with accurate info and ended up creating Bryna (given name). I don't know much of butterflies or names but I want to try to help Misplaced Pages for a long time. Hungryce (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Use of infoboxes

This is regarding the use of an infobox on articles that are about "Death of..." or "Disappearance of..." Specifically the article Death of Kendrick Johnson. I'm having a discussion with another user. They feel that infoboxes should never be used unless it's a biography. I feel like "Death of" articles are close enough to a bio to be used, there is a long standing wikipedia tradition of using them in these articles, they're helpful, people like them, and there are no good arguments against it. What are your thoughts on the topic? Bali88 (talk) 16:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

• Hi Bali88 I've seen similar issues on several other pages and I've always been confused. As far as I'm concerned I think every article should have an infobox as long as their is enough information (i.e. more than just a name and image, in which case just use a picture). The reason people don't want one is often difficult to ascertain, but often it appears to be along the lines of just a declaration its not appropriate from "this" type of article or "the information is in the text, people should just read the article". An infobox (along with images, good section titles, and good formatting) can help catch people interest and thus encourage people to start reading, and they are (IMHO) unobtrusive enough if you don't feel they add anything you can just ignore them. Unfortunately the policy WP:INFOBOXUSE states "The use of infoboxes is neither required nor prohibited for any article." hence these disagreements. Cheers KylieTastic (talk) 19:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks KylieTastic. I'd love more opinions on the topic too if anyone else want to comment. If anyone wants to chime in on the talk page, that would be great too. Bali88 (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

There are hundreds of infoboxes. The mentioned disagreement is about whether to use {{Infobox person}} on Death of Kendrick Johnson. We don't have an "Infobox death" but many different infoboxes have been used on death articles depending on circumstances. Some are irrelevant here but {{Infobox event}} is fairly general and has been used on some deaths, for example Death of Jeremiah Duggan. The idea is that the infobox should be about the death like the article and not about the deceased, although there are also many death articles which do use {{Infobox person}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Don't add an infobox if one is not already there on the article, and don't take one out if it already exists. Their use is controversial.. See Misplaced Pages:Disinfoboxes. GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:30, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

That's only an essay. There is a guideline at WP:INFOBOXUSE. Most articles have infoboxes and in most cases it is uncontroversial. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:10, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

My article may be deleted

I've recently written an article about my grandfather "Vasily Bunelik" (please see) It has a note on the page questioning notability. He was Ukrainian so sources are in Ukrainian or Russian. The chief source is a book he wrote in Ukrainian, which describes in great depth and detail the conditions in Mauthausen concentration camp during WW2. This is important because as far as I know few survivors wrote at any length about the camp. Is this a valid point for notability and how do I get it across to the would-be deleters? I could publish extracts from the book in English myself. Would that help? Bunelik (talk) 09:49, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Bunelik. I think you have misunderstood the meaning of notability in English Misplaced Pages (it is possible it is different in Ukrainain Misplaced Pages). Notability resides almost entirely in whether, and what, others have written about a subject. A work by the subject himself is incapable of contributing to notability. If there has been substantial writing (in any language) about him or the book, then those would ground an article about him or about the book. It sounds a bit as if what you are wanting to do is tell the world about something that is relatively unknown, and you think should be better known: if that is the case, that may be noble, but I'm afraid it is inconsistent with the fundamental purpose of Misplaced Pages: even for a worthy cause, it is still counted as promotion. --ColinFine (talk) 10:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Bunelik (talk) 16:53, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, my friend. Welcome to the Teahouse; have a cup of tea. I looked at the proposed article, and I noticed that one of those sources you cited there is nothing more than a blog. We don't allow blogs as sources on Misplaced Pages. It is this one. Also, the way to contest the proposed deletion is being discussed here. You had better go to that page and join the discussion. Good luck. GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Does Misplaced Pages allow users who have controversial beliefs to Edit Misplaced Pages to contribute in a positive way?

Is Misplaced Pages unfairly censoring users and userboxes that are from members of hate groups and those that support the believes and ideas of these controversial political organizations and pedophiles and pseudoscience promoters? Frogger48 (talk) 07:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Do you have some reason to suppose so? If so, what? Thnidu (talk) 08:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

No, but we are fairly and properly blocking their accounts, reverting their edits and deleting their userboxes. Have you stopped beating your wife?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit: Good! Hate and child-rape and unscience promotion do not belong here. (I'm not talking about discussion of them: obviously, for example, the Holocaust must be covered.)

If by the link you are implying that Frogger48's question is a loaded one: I figured it might well be, but also might be in good faith. If someone is, say, a skilled gardener and also belongs to a neo-Nazi organization, the latter in itself should not hinder them from editing about gardening and plants. --Thnidu (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I did not mean users that use Misplaced Pages to spread their own viewpoints, harass other editors, and vandalize wiki pages. I meant users who hold these beliefs, and still edit Wiki in harmony with other editors and in a neutral way, (in that their beliefs do not affect their editing). And not all pedophiles are child-rapists (People do not choose to be attracted to children or adults any more than they choose to be attracted to males or females. Not all pedophiles are child molesters (or vice versa). Child molesters are defined by their acts; pedophiles are defined by their desires... "Dr. Ray Blanchard, Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Toronto; Former Head of Clinical Sexology Services in the Law and Mental Health Program of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health; Served on the American Psychiatric Association's DSM-IV and on the DSM-5's Work Group on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders.). Misplaced Pages should not be used to mock those who have pseudoscientific beliefs or attack there ideas (or those of hate groups or religious fundamentalists) These people have the right to feel welcome here, if, of course, theyr intions are to help, as opposed to, hurt, Misplaced Pages. Frogger48 (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Frogger48: BOGGLE Well, yeah. I should have distinguished child molesters from pedophiles. I'm obviously missing something: What question did you mean to imply was a leading question? (I'm also getting the sense we may be arguing in circles over something we have no significant disagreement on at all.) To discuss this, please {{Ping}} me. --Thnidu (talk) 07:07, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

@Thnidu: My question was, "Does Misplaced Pages allow users who have beliefs that align with the ideas in religious fundamentalist or hate groups or sexual positions and subcultures that are controversial (skinheads, necrophiles, zoophiles, pedophiles, etc.) or people who come from other stigmatized social groups who won't use wiki to harm or convert others, vandalize pages to support their beliefs, or to engage in criminal activity as well as it doesn't prevent the specific users to talk about their ideas on their talk pages in a friendly non-hurtful way.?" "I also want to know if Misplaced Pages is biased or censors the articles about groups that promote these beliefs, like the page for NAMBLA for example." P.S. My question was confusing and I apologize for offending anyone, but I choose to do this in order to support freedom of speech on Misplaced Pages

--

Well, this may be the wrong place for such a heated discussion. We might drive away some of the newcomers. Simply my opinion. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 08:58, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree, but I think that this question is very important to have an answer to. Frogger48 (talk) 10:49, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

inline interlanguage link in citation template?

I'm copyediting an article for the current GOCE Blitz. Part of the work involves converting long citations that are currently in the text of the article to references. The citation templates have an argument for the author's article. But this source is in German, and English WP has no article about the author, although German WP does.

If this were an ordinary inline interlanguage link I'd use {{ill|de|Wilhelm Pape}} to get

de 

But when I put that into {{cite book}} I get this:

Pape, W.; Benseler, G. E. (1875). Wörterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen (in German). F. Vieweg und sohn. Retrieved 20 February 2015. {{cite book}}: Check |author-link= value (help)

Any suggestions? Thnidu (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Thnidu, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, it's usually not possible to embed other templates inside the cite templates. Among other things it messes up the metadata that they output. But it's OK to just go ahead and list the name like this: "author-link=Wilhelm Pape". That will show up as a red link, but many editors do that anyway, as a sign that it would be nice to have this article.

The other thing you could do is to create a stub of the article yourself, and link that to the German Misplaced Pages, so that readers can find it that way. In fact I just did that, by creating the article Wilhelm Pape. That should work as normal – Margin1522 (talk) 12:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

And I have edited the Wikidata to include the English version in the inter-language links. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:51, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thnidu, a simpler way is to write |author-link=:de:Wilhelm Pape like this:

Pape, W. ; Benseler, G. E. (1875). Wörterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen (in German). F. Vieweg und sohn. Retrieved 20 February 2015.

Jonesey95 19:49, 20 February 2015

@Jonesey95, David Biddulph, and Margin1522: Thank you, comrades.

• Jonesey95, I think I tried |author-link=:de:Wilhelm Pape. But unlike {{ill}}, it gives no in-line indication that there is no English article. And thanks for "Also adding |template-doc-demo= to keep this page out of the error category": I hadn't known of that parameter. Does it work in all templates? I don't see any way of searching for a description of it, other than an Everything search; there, looking at almost any of the hits will explain it, but is there a way to search for a parameter as such?
• Margin1522: Thanks much! That ain't just a stub, that's (the) genuine article! You translated the bulk of the German article :-D My German's not nearly up to that. And I tried |author-link=Wilhelm Pape, but parallel to my answer to Jonesey95,

  unlike {{ill}}, it gives no in-line indication that there is a German article.

• David Biddulph, many thanks.

So, my helpful fellow editors, you have solved the problem for now, but not for the next time such a situation arises. I think we need an additional couple of parameters that, like "template-doc-demo", can be added to any citation template (at least!) to do the work that {{tn:ill}} does: "There's a page for this on another wiki." E.g.,

|interwiki-for=Wilhelm Pape |interwiki-name=de:Wilhelm Pape

... and then, Gott mit uns, interwiki-for1, interwiki-name1, interwiki-for2..., for additional authors, editors, and who knows what else. Where should such a suggestion go? (Other than "where the sun don't shine", please!) --Thnidu (talk) 00:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

|template-doc-demo= is documented and works in the Citation Style 1 "cite" templates that share code and documentation, like {{cite book}} and {{cite journal}}. It is used when an error is being demonstrated and should not be (wrongly) "fixed" by a well-meaning gnome. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

This makes my head hurt. I am going to have one of those donuts over there. GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:00, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Intervention needed

There has been disruptive editing on Sophie Hunter's page (see discussion on Talk:Sophie_Hunter#Cites_for_18_February_2015_edits) due to a user insisting of editing when all his/her rational are in violation of ALL Misplaced Pages:Core content policies. The version of the page is currently fine but please monitor User:Avianax as he/she has been reverting this for the past two days.181.30.6.38 (talk) 06:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I guess you should encourage User:Avianax to discuss the matter on the talk page before reverting and make the point clear or tell that constant reverting can lead to a ban.Abhinav0908 (talk) 16:02, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Wrong place for this, I am afraid. We don't do interventions here. We sit around and drink tea and help out newcomers. At least I do. Yum. Good donut. GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:03, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

not-smart me

how am i supposed to improve articles if everything i know is already on it? Valehd (talk) 03:59, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Read outside Misplaced Pages and learn some more. And there are always new things in the world to write about -- new sports events , new music, newly elected politicians. DGG ( talk ) 04:11, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I hate to contradict such a respected editor as my friend, DGG, but I also recommend taking a look at older topics. As for music, any smash hit song of the past deserves an article. Take a look at 1937 in music, as just one random example. The hit record system was well-entrenched by then, and at least ten hit songs are mentioned in that article which lack articles. Those include hits by artists remembered today, such as Guy Lombardo, Benny Goodman, Mahalia Jackson, Bing Crosby and Rudy Vallee. Anyone who fears their article might get deleted can write an article about any one of those ten songs, with a high degree of certainty that an article with even one decent reference will not be deleted. Another example: according to WP:POLITICIAN, any member of a state or provincial legislature is considered notable. There are countless members of such legislatures from the 19th and early 20th centuries who lack Misplaced Pages biographies. Who represented your home town in 1883? Your local library and your local newspaper archives, and the history website of the legislature they served in are jam packed full of reliable sources that can be used to create these biographies. There are many highly notable athletes, such as Olympic competitors active 80 or 90 years ago, who lack Misplaced Pages biographies. Plenty of source material is readily available. Cullen Let's discuss it 05:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

That's not a contradiction, that's a supplement. There are probably at least 4 million potential articles of similar significance to the ones we have here. Cullen328 mentioned some. Additional ones include every book on the NYT best seller list, everyone who has ever held a distinguished professorship at a major university, every judge of the highest court in a state, thousands of earlier athletes chose names we know and list, but where the articles have not yet been written.

And that accounts for the major English speaking countries only. The rest of the world can and should be covered in equal detail, which should add another 8 or 10 million at the least, tho we probably won't get to many with some sort of automatic translation.

I use the example of new things because that shows we will never be finished, even if we do all the 15 or so million included above. I also mention it because many of those topics will be just as exciting and important then as the most exciting and important topics now. DGG ( talk ) 08:48, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I like both of the above remarks. GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:06, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

How to create a new page?

How do I create a new page? Son of All (talk) 03:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

you click a red link Valehd (talk) 04:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Misplaced Pages and Teahouse! First of, I left you a welcome message on your talk page to help you get started on Misplaced Pages. Second, how to create a new page, you first want to ensure that your article subject meets notability criteria and has been covered by reliable sources. Now tot he creating part, Misplaced Pages has several pages to help you get started, however I would suggest Articles for Creation, a friendly place where you could start an article with assistance and reviewing of experienced editors. Click "Click here to create an article now!" button and it will guide you through, with pre-filled templates to give you a base start. ///EuroCarGT 04:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Created a page, submitted for editing. Need to pass along contact information (changed companies)

Hi - i created, well tried to create a page called "Gravity Media," while working for the advertising agency by that name. I followed all the rules, cited lots of third party sources and build a nice robust post. I left the agency, but would like to pass along the information necessary to follow up with the page - or a link so they can further edit while its in review, etc. How do I find the page? I can not recall my log-in information. Thanks. Adam 01:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:6:5100:854:B0C2:B2CB:8DAE:7CBB (talk)

I think the page you are looking for is probably Draft:Gravity Media (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), which was declined by DGG on 25 October as non-notable. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 01:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

All Misplaced Pages accounts represent individuals; if anyone would like to work on the page further, they would need to make a new account, and make it clear that a/ it represents an individual and b/that the individual represents the company and therefore has a WP:Conflict of Interest. But placements on a list, minor awards--especially when they are not for first place--, and mere announcements, do not make for notability--you need in depth articles about the firm. DGG ( talk ) 03:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

How to combat a political party deleting any information they deem unfavourable for their party

In this page in particular; https://en.wikipedia.org/CBD_and_South_East_Light_Rail there appear to be a number of usernames directly linked (through examining their edit and creation histories) to one political party. They remove any factual information they appear to perceive as damaging for their party. They normally do not give any reason nor do they communicate to question any items they delete. I have been attempting to provide a balanced/neutral page with all material sourced from verifiable/reputable sources including the project's own material, Hansard (for dates and Parliamentary orders etc) as well as published newspaper articles. The edits (mainly entire deletions) made of my and others contributions or corrections to selective and misleading quotes from Media Releases (leaving out the first part of a sentence that places the included text in context) provide no justification. How should I and others progress?

Thanks for your time.

regardsA M R Sydney (talk) 00:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)A M R SydneyA M R Sydney (talk) 00:55, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, A M R Sydney, and welcome to the Teahouse. I took a look at the material you've been adding, and it looks like right away you've run into one of the most difficult problems we have with neutrality. In addition to being reliably sourced, there is the question of due weight. You may feel that all of that material is necessary to understand the issues, but others may feel that we don't need to go into that level of detail. Especially when a topic is controversial, with pro- and anti- viewpoints, you sometimes see one side trying to prevent the other side from adding all of the details that it would like. The best course in this case is to step back and look at it from the viewpoint of our best secondary secondary sources. What do they consider to be important? Obviously the cost is going to be important, so that should be described in some detail. Specific bus routes or documents that may or may not exist, maybe not so much.

I also looked at the edit history of the editor who removed a big chunk of your material, and it looks like he has done a lot of work on other rail lines. So rather than politics, it may be that he is just really interested in rail transport and has some experience in writing articles about it. I'd suggest more communication on the talk page. You could ask what objections he had to that material, and make your case for why you think it's important. This is a good process because often it's a way to identify the points that everybody can agree on as important, and the best sources. He for his part should have given better reasons in his edit summary and discussed his concerns on the talk page before acting. So that's what I would suggest. If you can find points of agreement, then it's likely that our readers will interested in those points too, and concentrating on them will improve the article. – Margin1522 (talk) 02:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Articles about people who ave recently died.

Hello, I would like to write an article about a Classical guitarist from Lubbock, Texas, but she recently committed suicide. I know of only one source at this time, her website http://www.susangrisani.com. I am passionate about the article for two reasons but the biggest reason is that I don't want her memory to be punished because of how she died. Can I proceed just by following the rules for WP BLPs? Would anyone care to work on the article with me. her name is Susan Grisanti, and she was known in West Texas as The First Lady of Classical Guitar.Lbhiggin (talk) 00:10, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

You should not write about someone to punish them. Articles must be written in a neutral point of view. See the guidance at WP:NPOV. RudolfRed (talk) 00:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Also, if the only available source is her own website, she would most likely not be considered notable, which is the requirement for having an article on Misplaced Pages. Notability means that reliable secondary sources (ie, books and the media) have talked about her in detail. John from Idegon (talk) 01:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I did not mean that i wanted her punished. Actually, it's just the opposite, to me, suicide is just another form of death like a car accident. I don't want her to be left out because of suicide. Although I do understand where you're coming from about NPOV.Lbhiggin (talk) 01:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

The criteria are at WP:MUSICBIO. If she meets them, and you can find good sources to prove it, write the article. If not, not; there are many other places on the web. DGG ( talk ) 04:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lbhiggin and welcome to Misplaced Pages. I think it's commendable that you want people to remember Ms. Grisanti for the way that she lived instead of the way that she died. However, as DGG points out, there are probably better ways for you to do this than Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages articles are not intended to be memorial pages per se; They are intended to be neutrally written accounts of what reliable sources have to say about something or someone. Misplaced Pages articles are also not owned by their creators or any contributing editors. So, if by chance you are able to establish Ms. Grisanti's notability and get an article about her approved, there is still no way for you to ensure that information about the way she died will never be added to the article. It is likely that any significant coverage, good or bad, that Ms. Grisanti has received in reliable sources will eventually find it's way into any Misplaced Pages article about her and stay there as long as it satisfies relevant Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines and there is a consensus in favor of keeping it. - Marchjuly (talk) 05:26, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

She seemed to be locally notable, per http://amarillo.com/news/texas-news/2013-03-05/hundreds-mourn-passing-lubbocks-guitar-lady, and perhaps the above editor can find some other WP:Reliable sources for a Misplaced Pages article. I applaud his or her intent and simply note that we are all here to build an encyclopedia; this lady might or might not qualify. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:13, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

How to transfer document out of sandbox to the encyclopedia

I have written an article in the sandbox about the Eureka Quartzite formation. Now, I want to make it an official Wiki entryAhlitanah (talk) 00:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Ahlitanah, welcome back to the Teahouse! You can edit the sandbox and add the code {{subst:submit}}. This will submit it for review to make sure it's appropriate. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 02:44, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Article for creation

Hello. I think an article should be created on the chips Australian snack food "Grain Waves". I have attempted and failed. I found this place on Misplaced Pages called articles for creation but I didn't understand it. I thought it might have been a place where you suggest an article to be made but I don't know. The snack itself is notable enough to warrant an article. It's is as notable as anything in the product list Here. You Can easily find references for it. If someone where to create it I would definitely contribute. But it's the initial creation process I am struggling with. Ping me of a reply. DangerousJXD (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@DangerousJXD: Hi DangerousJXD. I just performed a few Google Books searches of "Grain Waves", each with a delimiter included to remove false positives (such as snack, smiths and so on) and failed to find a single reliable source discussing this snack food in any detail. The existence of reliable sources discussing a topic in detail and which sources are independent from the topic is the basis for having an article. Finding such sources first, seeing what they say, and then writing based on that while citing to them, is the best way to write here. I will gladly start the article if you can provide a links to a number of sources. My failure to find any, though, makes me think this topic may not warrant one, and might better remain a simple listing as one of Smith's products in its article (and that it should not be red-linked). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

P.S. articles for creation is a guided forum for users to write an article and then submit it for review and acceptance. There is a dedicated forum to suggest that an article on a particular topic be created as you were looking for, Misplaced Pages:Requested articles, but in my experience it's like dropping a penny down the Challenger Deep. That is, there are numerous listings at that forum's various pages from years and years ago that haven't been touched.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:00, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

I Need Hope

Hey, I know this question won't have very much to do with editing Misplaced Pages, but It is (my question is) what can you have hope in this world that good will prevail over evil? Frogger48 (talk) 22:06, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, you can always have hope. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC).

Don't read articles like ISIS, Depression, and Death then . Try Happiness! Jokes aside, very interesting question... EoRdE6 22:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I prefer to think of it as a matter of choice. I can't control what other people do, but at least I can make my own choices and that's enough to make a difference to my little corner of the world.--Gronk Oz (talk) 23:35, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not a fan of the work "hope" it sort of means I don't have choice or there is a lack of choice - for me I feel the word "trust" is more powerful. And in response to the original question - will good prevail over evil - there will always be a balance - it has to be in perfect equilibrium. Sometime the noise of the 'evil' is louder and we have to seek out the good a little harder. Empowering you (talk) 14:19, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages itself is a sign of hope. Think about how many people contributed to providing something that helps many others. A huge glass is now half full that nobody even could have imagined a generation ago. — Sebastian 17:40, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Frogger48: I live by what Edmund Burke is credited to have said first (and many wise men and women have quoted since): "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." So, I do something: I edit here. Among other things. w.carter-Talk 20:58, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect move help

I moved an article to its correct title, because I thought it was a new article. However, the article was a 2006 redirect that was correct, but had been incorrectly turned into an article on a different topic (where I moved it).

Can anyone fix the mess or tell me how to, as it seems that edit histories are very important and the original redirect with its edit history should remain.

I turned Tuberous sclerosis complex into Tuberous sclerosis complex tumor suppressors because that is what the stub article, which I found in Uncategorized from January 2015, was about. However, Tuberous sclerosis complex was a redirect created in 2006 to Tuberous sclerosis, and an editor incorrectly edited it to be about Tuberous sclerosis complex tumor suppressors, an entirely different topic. The original redirect should be left as it was, the article I moved should be at Tuberous sclerosis complex tumor suppressors. MicroPaLeo (talk) 19:44, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll have a quick look and see if I can. For future reference Misplaced Pages:Requested moves/Technical requests is a good place for this sort of thing. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC).

Thanks. It seemed straigth-forward, as if the article had just been created and left uncategorized, though. I am a little lost in the mess, and I appreciate the help. MicroPaLeo (talk) 22:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

It's done, there was a little confusion as the page you changed was Tuberous Sclerosis Complex, not Tuberous sclerosis complex ... both now redirect to Tuberous sclerosis. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC).

That's why when I looked again, it looked like it had been done on one end. Thanks! MicroPaLeo (talk) 23:28, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

How to find neutral senior editors for the sexism article

Good evening,

I tried adding some examples of sexism against men into the, nothing big that would change the overall. However, there are two senior editors which block any attempts and there is already a long and futile discussion on the talk pages. They block me and other with a ton wiki acronyms and regulations, and I am not too frustrated to carry on by myself. However, I do believe something should be done, because currently the article is too suggestive to be part of and encyclopedia.

I think the article needs some serious reworking for three reasons: 1) It is manly a collection of examples (often strongly suggestive) and not an encyclopedia article (please compare it to the racism article). 2) There is no systematic information about research on that topic given. 3) Although media coverage and research focus almost exclusively on sexism of men against women, other combinations should be also part of the article (i.e. women-women, men-men, women-men).

The result should be a scientifically sound and fairly neutral article.

Where can I find some people which are experienced in wiki editing and sufficiently neutral to improve this article?

Kind Regards, Lucentcalendar (talk) 18:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome. While we can't change the behavior of other editors, I can suggest a few things. Make sure all contributions are supported by reliable sources. Second, make good use of edit summaries explaining what and why you are doing something, maybe making reference to your post on the talk page. Third don't remove too much content in one edit. This concerns editors into instant reversion without thinking. Do it in steps with explanations for each removal. Good luck! EoRdE6 22:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Greetings here in the Teahouse to you Lucentcalendar. Your comment has piqued my interest quite a bit and I have been very busy in the sexism article trying to get it cleaned up. It reads more like a magazine article to me. I just wanted to point out one thing at this point, and that is that there are really no senior editors. We all have the same rights and responsibilities and privileges. I invite you to return to the sexism article and give me some of your thoughts.

  Bfpage |leave a message  23:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

how to insert my user name in these posts

I created a sign-in but don't know how to id myself in these posts. Thanks for your help. jeannef 2601:6:1500:9600:9984:C4CE:15D5:E405 (talk) 17:08, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi there, and welcome to the Teahouse. You currently aren't signed into your account, which is why you appear to be editing from an IP address. Head over to Special:UserLogin to log into the account you created. You can then sign your posts as you just did, by instering four tildes (~~~~) after your message. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Another way to log in is the "Log in" option in the top right corner of the screen. (This is on a PC; not sure where it is if you're using a phone.)--Gronk Oz (talk) 23:43, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Article rejected several time - need advice

Article written for client was rejected several times as too promotional. I've pasted the last rejected one and a recent update we want to submit. Can you give me advice? Thanks for the help.

2601:6:1500:9600:9984:C4CE:15D5:E405 (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

It feels to much like a ad. Try rewriting it in a encyclopedic way. Clubjustin3 (talk) 17:39, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, 2601:6:1500:9600:9984:C4CE:15D5:E405. I'm afraid that you and your client are under a misconception about Misplaced Pages. To first approximation, Misplaced Pages is not interested in what a subject (whether a person or an organisation) has to say about themselves, or what they have published. Misplaced Pages is mostly interested in what other people, unconnected with the subject, have written about the subject, and published in reliable places. Ideally, every single piece of information in an article should be individually referenced to a reliable published source, and most of them to sources unconnected with the subject. I can't easily look at the references in your draft above, but it does not look to me as if many of them, if any, are independent articles that write substantially about SmileCareClub (The Nashville Business Journal looks from its title as if it might). You need to find several such sources, all unconnected with the SmileCareClub or its funders, and base the article should say almost nothing that is not in one of these sources.

Further, the article should be written in a neutral way, and take into account all published views on the subject (critical as well as approving). This is difficult for somebody connected with the subject to do, which is why editing with a conflict of interest is discouraged. Paid editing in particular is rather strongly discouraged, (and in my personal opinion, any organisation or person who pays somebody to work on a Misplaced Pages article about them creates the presumption that they are doing so for their own interests rather than Misplaced Pages's).

So, if you wish to continue, you need to declare your paid status (preferable create a Misplaced Pages account, in order to have a static user page on which to do this); find substantial independent writing about the organisation, published in reliable places, and base your writing pretty well exclusively on those; read the links above, and also about neutral point of view and your first article; and use the article wizard to draft it in a separate workspace and then submit it for review. --ColinFine (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Help Editing

So I was going to rewrite and resource a fairly large article and I have done 2 sections however I the article is a mess (wrote the problems in the talk page). Just wondering if there is a place I can post the article for it to get edited or if someone would do it. I'm still relatively new and this would take me ages. The article is https://en.wikipedia.org/City_Creek_Center Thanks Wrightie99 (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! I'm afraid Misplaced Pages has an eternal backlog, if you really want something done, you've got to be bold and just do it. It can always be done in parts, or the draft space and then moved. Good luck! EoRdE6 19:35, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Wrightie99, I can start you off with some specific advice, based on what has been considered good practice for similar articles. Remove statements of praise, such as " This building will offer exciting opportunities for Salt Lake City". That's pure puffery. Trim the space for routine features--they needn't be described in detail. remove names of tenants except perhaps the major flagships. Be careful with statements about what is hope for in the future. Document everything with a 3rd party reference--especially statements of controversy--major newspaper reports are what's need for that. Remove the duplication of the information from 99 West--either combine the two articles or just make a link. Remove then image gallery that shows nothing important, such as the part of the center occupied by a grocery store--they go in a publicity booklet, not an encyclopedia.

We do have a backlog, but even though I cannot rewrite every article that needs it, I will always try to offer specific assistance to anyone asking in evident good faith. DGG ( talk ) 03:37, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, I'l start going through the article Wrightie99 (talk) 09:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

New Article Creation and Citation Help

Please i am New to WIKI but i am interested in becoming an Editor i have started with a New topic on RAY BLAZE but was refused due to Citation and i have tried to read on how this works but Since am New still looking for may way around. Any Help will be Really appreciated on how to get the minimum standard for inline citations of my Article. Henryokeyia (talk) 14:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Two pages that will hopefully help you out: this essay will give you the basics of how to correctly add a citation, and this page explains the sort of citations that you need - many of those in your draft are not suitable for use on Misplaced Pages. Yunshui _水 15:08, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

How to message to another user

Hello, I undid an edit on the page Mauritius starling on the status section wich reported it as extinct by the IUCN but if you search for the species on the IUCN it doesn't appear so I undid it but this morning I came to see that an user has undid my edit how can I leave a message to him about the reasons I did it?Owlsofeurope (talk) 12:47, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Owlsofeurope. If you click on the "View history" tab at the top of any page, you can see a list of edits made to it - for Mauritius starling it looks like this. Here you can see that your edit was reverted by Gaff - next to his name is a link labelled "talk" which will take you to his talkpage. Click on the "New section" tab at the top of his talkpage to leave him a message. There's more information on using talkpages at WP:TALK. Yunshui _水 15:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

What to do so the article I submitted is accepted

I submitted an article about the pianist and composer Arik Strauss and it was declined for reasons I don't understand. I was asked for sources and I don't know what is needed by that. I did put in external links reviews on his work posted in two important jazz music sites. Is it not enough? I await your reply. Thank you.ציפור שיר (talk) 11:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. In the grey box inside the pink box at the top of your draft it says: "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Misplaced Pages's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you." The words which appear in blue in the original message are wikilinks, which in each case take you to useful information which ought to answer your question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Biddulph (talk • contribs) 11:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

You will see that the same message, with the same links, appear in the feedback message on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:47, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello David Biddulph. Thank you for your reply. As you advised I briefed through the instructions concerning adding inline citations and references to an article, but I still have a problem doing it. I wrote the article based on personal acqaintance with the musician and on the info he gave me. I don't have references except, maybe, those reviews I put in external links. Maybe he can find some more articles from before 25 years. He can try and look it up, but why couldn't it be accepted withouth it? (In the Hebrew version it was accepted as is). Please instruct me further. Again thank you.ציפור שיר (talk) 12:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

In the English Misplaced Pages if there are no published reliable sources independent of the subject then the article cannot exist. Verifiability is one of the basic tenets here. Your personal acquaintance counts as original research and is not acceptable as a source for an English Misplaced Pages article. The Hebrew Misplaced Pages may, of course, have different criteria, but they do not affect us here. If the subject receives published coverage at some stage in the future then of course an article can be written then. - --David Biddulph (talk) 13:11, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Pseudoscience

The articles that talk about pseudoscience seem to be pro-skeptic and anti-pseudoscience, in that the article are harsh towards the topics. What do you thing about this? ex. Naturopathy article labels natural medicine as dangerous and harmful. Frogger48 (talk) 08:14, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages articles must be neutral but true as well. and it is true that they are dangerous as no proper scientific procedure or belief is used. though it may hurt some peoples' feelings, we can't help it.

For example; venomous snakes: like a cobra for instance. Cobra usually doesn't attack and bite until threat displayed. But when they do it is dangerous and thus it is there.

~"aGastya" ✉ let’s talk about it :) 08:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I understand. But, Lots of links used in these articles are from orgs that promote the Skeptic movement (like the Skeptic's Dictionary). Are sources like theses reliable, by standards of Misplaced Pages?Frogger48 (talk) 08:27, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

There's a whole noticeboard, Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard dedicated to the subject of what is or isn't a reliable source. If you have specific sources that you want to enquire about that's the place to do it. Pseudoscience is also the subject of it's own guidance notes at WP:FRINGE/PS. Nthep (talk) 10:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Deletion

Can you please help me by giving me information of getting back my wikipedia account from deletion by the authority due to speedy deletion criteria? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monirlawbd (talk • contribs) 06:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Monirlawbd, welcome to the Teahouse. Your account itself is not up for deletion, but rather the page you've written.

Please understand that Misplaced Pages is not for advertising, publicity, or social networking. If you want to have an article about an organization on Misplaced Pages, you need to find a significant number of reliable, independent sources that discuss it in detail (more information).

You should go to Articles for creation to rewrite the article, so there is a lesser chance of it being deleted. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 07:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The Criticism of Misplaced Pages page should have a section about criticism of the Misplaced Pages Teahouse

Hello, on the criticism of Misplaced Pages page, should there be a section that points out criticisms of the Treahouse on the English Misplaced Pages? like to know th. Thanx. Frogger48 (talk) 04:41, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi again, @Frogger48: Misplaced Pages covers what is found in reliable, published sources. If the Teahouse has received criticism that has been covered in such sources (such as news sources, articles, journals, etc.), then it could potentially be added - but there hasn't been much coverage, if at all, as far as I'm aware. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:47, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually, there has been quite a bit of coverage of the Teahouse in reliable sources, and you can find links to five instances of such coverage in a yellow box at the top of the Teahouse talk page. The problem for Frogger48's proposal is that the coverage has been mostly positive instead of critical. If someone writes a critical article about the Teahouse hosts, I hope they mention me. I can always use some constructive criticism. Cullen Let's discuss it 05:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

What about critiscisms of Misplaced Pages from racial realists and white supremacists/black supremacists? Frogger48 (talk) 06:10, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Criticism of Misplaced Pages is unavoidable. In fact nowadays almost everything get criticized as different people have different opinions. We can not cover every opinion here on Misplaced Pages. But widely criticized areas usually mentioned. I believe we should first try to fix those issues rather than chasing after more criticism.--Chamith (talk) 06:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

{{ Hey, thanks for the help, your article could uuse a section on Misplaced Pages and cyberbulling though.Frogger48 (talk) 08:36, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

How to credit the originators of an image which has been tweaked

Hello! There's been some discussion on my talkpage, User talk:Rosiestep#Kate Brown, regarding a banner which I asked to be tweaked so that it can be used at an alternate event on International Women's Day. The conversation actually began here: Misplaced Pages:WikiWomen's History Month/2015/Images#Banner for the events in Stockholm. Xanthomelanoussprog (talk · contribs) has made the update, but hasn't upload to Commons as they are asking about attribution to the original creator. Does someone here have an answer for that? Thank you. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rosiestep. This is a bit of a tricky one because the image being modified, is itself a modification of two other images. The license (CC BY 4.0) simply provides for "appropriate credit", "provid a link to the license", and "indicat if changes were made", so there's no rote formula to follow. I suggest for the edit summary upon the upload, the use of this text (it can't provide complete copyright attribution because your characters are limited by the edit summary length):

Image taken and modified from ] created by ]; further attribution provided on project page

Then you might use this for the information template parameters:

{{Information
|description= INSERT
|date= INSERT
|source={{own}}, as modification of ], which in turn was:
*{{derived from|Oyida Peaks riveting as part of her NYA training 1a34885v.jpg|display=50}} and
*{{derived from|Misplaced Pages-logo-v2.svg|display=50}}
|author=] (this file);<br />] (file modified);<br /> Hollem, Howard R., photographer (for first derived file, above); and<br />] (concept by ]); Wikimedia (for second derived file, above).
}}

Of course, the image page must also display a CC BY 4.0 license with a link so just use {{self|cc-by-4.0}}, as the file description page for the image being modified does. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi Rosiestep, you can see how the creator of this pic has dealt with the attributions. Tweaking tweaked pics is like an infinity mirror, you take it one "layer" at the time and include all. w.carter-Talk 09:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for all this info! @Xanthomelanoussprog: does this answer your question? --Rosiestep (talk) 15:28, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much Fuhghettaboutit- I uploaded the image to Commons, but somehow the process didn't seem to allow for the addition of the attribution information. Presumably this can be added by someone else ('cos I seem to have some mental block about Commons ). Xanthomelanoussprog (talk) 08:43, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Just have to say I'm super happy to see the image reused for the San Francisco event! :D Sara Mörtsell (WMSE) (talk) 12:51, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

@Xanthomelanoussprog: I've fixed the attribution. I think you thought it all had to be done on the original upload. For future reference, to place the above attribution material what I did was just copied what I prepared above, went to the image, clicked edit, and then pasted and saved. That's it!:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

"G" sorting to "C" on a category page

OK I'm baffled. God Moves on the Water turns up (wrongly) under "C" in Category:Works about RMS Titanic. But (correctly) under "G" in Category:Blind Willie Johnson songs, Category:1929 songs and Category:Blues song stubs. W - as they say - tf? Narky Blert (talk) 01:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

PS I added that totally unnecessary DEFAULTSORT tag only to see if it made any difference. It didn't. Narky Blert (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Ok, I've gone ahead and fixed the issue for you. See what I did here. When adding a Category, don't put any of "|" in it. They will change where it appears in the listing. Just list each category individually. EoRdE6 01:55, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

See more at Misplaced Pages:Categorization#Sort keys. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:30, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@EoRdE6: @PrimeHunter: Gottit, thanks! (Slaps self on head, I've used that pipe trick before now to force list articles and the like to the head of a category, outside the alphabetic list.) Narky Blert (talk) 10:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Possible WP:UNCIVIL

I tried to post a question earlier but it didn't seem to take. There is an editor that is asking (what I consider) offensive and off-topic questions. I have already asked them to stop on their talk page and they do not seem to care. What should I do? Darknipples (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Welcome back to the Teahouse DN. I looked at the comments from the other editor and found them to be annoying, but I've seen a lot worse. As long as there isn't a reverting war going on my best advice is to not communicate with this editor if at all possible. Discussions taking place on talk pages can often get incredibly rude and disruptive. On a personal level, if I know that I am annoying someone I will do what I can to stop being that way. Your interactions on this other editor's talk page probably won't resolve anything for either of you. If you would really like someone to leave a comment and ask the editor in question to "play more nicely" I can do that, but I really don't think it would do much good. Remember the Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing and at this point I'm not sure I really accomplished anything for you.

  Bfpage |leave a message  01:03, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@Bfpage: There is a may be dispute on edit war-ing, but it is with another editor and the one I am referring to. If you could ask them to please consider why their comments and questions are offensive it would be appreciated. Is there any other recourse that might work? Something that deals with stereotypes and name-calling? Darknipples (talk) 01:09, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I recommend you work on a different page for awhile, and not continue to engage. See WP:DISENGAGE RudolfRed (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

If you feel I should disengage from dealing with that particular editor I agree, however, my passion for WP began with this article, and I do not see how allowing them to drive me away does anyone any good, with all due respect. Am I "wrong" in coming to the TEAHOUSE to discuss this issue? Darknipples (talk) 02:22, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I feel your pain, DN. I have been editing for less than a year, so I don't have nearly the experience of the other people who will give you answers here in the Teahouse, but perhaps that also means I am closer to those initial experiences which you talk about. In my less mature days, I got involved in some very heated discussions with another editor, who turned out to be employed by the organization whose page I was editing. I was right, and I knew I was, and I could document from every angle to show I was, but he kept thwarting me. Eventually in frustration, I asked for advice here in the Teahouse. Two surprising things happened. Firstly, one of the senior editors here reverted my changes, saying that I had breached a guideline. Secondly, and most valuable of all, I was advised to step away for a week and do other things. I thought that was about the dumbest idea I had ever heard, but I took the advice anyway. I edited other pages, nothing to do with the problem one. I debated questions with all sorts of other editors and we reached consensus. I learned more about editing and the guidelines and what makes for a better Misplaced Pages. In the end, it was about a month before I came back to that "problem" article. When I did, as if by magic I could see what those other folks had been talking about. I approached the issue from a very different viewpoint, had no problems with the other editor, and the resulting changes I came up with are still there today.

So to answer your questions from a not-quite-beginner's standpoint:

• I think it is okay to ask questions like that in the Teahouse. You may not get the answers you wanted or expected, but they just might be the answers you need.
• Walking away and throwing yourself into something else (at least for a time) helped me a lot; it might help you too. --Gronk Oz (talk) 03:21, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

@Gronk Oz: Your advice makes sense and I am taking you up on it. However, when I return in a week, if these issues are unresolved and the article goes to shambles, I'll be coming to you personally for some support ;-) Thanks for the advice, and rest assured it is being taken to heart. Darknipples (talk) 03:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks to Gronk Oz for some very good advice. Let's break down how this dispute started. The editor in question edited Gun show loophole, adding a statement that "gun school loophole" is a term that only gun control advocates use, and their edit summary said "only hoplophobes use this phrase". For those unfamiliar with the "inside baseball" terminology of U.S. gun politics, hoplophobe is an obscure term that means someone who has an irrational fear of guns. Some gun rights activists use the term to describe their opponents in polemics. Its opposite is, perhaps, "gun nut", which is at least easier to understand, but also commonly used in polemics. The edit summary, on its face, seems to refer to people in the "real world", as opposed to Misplaced Pages editors in general, or Lightbreather Darknipples in particular. If the edit is incorrect, the best response is to point to reliable sources other than known gun control advocates who use the phrase "gun show loophole", which may include government agencies, neutral academics who take no stand on gun control issues, or reliable publications which have not endorsed gun control. Another response might be to calmly explain that you, personally, have no fear of guns. Instead, Lightbreather Darknipples, it seems that you chose to take offense and set out on a campaign of chastising the other editor. Quite predictably, things went downhill from there.

The best thing to do when someone throws out "argument bait" is to ignore the bait, search for the substance in the other editor's view of things, and to address that concern calmly and rationally. So where is the calm response about the range of reliable sources other than known gun control advocates, who use the phrase "gun show loophole", without a critical or ironic stance? That is by far the best way to respond.

One of the great advantages of evolving into a general purpose editor interested in a wide range of topics as opposed to a single purpose editor is that you realize that countless articles need your help, that this encyclopedia must accommodate a wide range of views, that there are bitter disputes where you have no "dog in the fight", that the ability to evaluate all sides of a dispute can be cultivated and developed, and that the neutral point of view is probably the most important attribute that every serious, long-term Misplaced Pages editor should cultivate. Cullen Let's discuss it 05:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Pardon me, Cullen328, but you seemed to have referred to me as Lightbreather...

• "Instead, Lightbreather, it seems that you chose to take offense and set out on a campaign of chastising the other editor. Quite predictably, things went downhill from there."

If so, you are very mistaken. It also seems as if you are defending the stereotype of gun control advocates as "hoplophobes". Forgive me if I'm incorrect in my perception...Also, if you feel I am merely a "sock" of Lightbreather's, let's request a "checkuser" (whatever that is). Darknipples (talk) 05:49, 19 February 2015 (UTC) Sorry, but this is not what I expected. I am very disappointment by this. I came here for help, and now I feel as though I'm being tricked into saying something that isn't true. Now where am I supposed to turn? Darknipples (talk) 06:15, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I apologize to you, Darknipples, for referring to you by another editor's name. I am very tired and pretty old, and accidentally used the name of another editor active on that page, and I do regret that error. If it seems to you that I am defending the use of the term "hoplophobe", then I think you may be influenced by my editor name error. Since I assume good faith of you, and assume that you strive to be a neutral editor, then I also assume that you would object as strongly to calling any person a "gun nut" as you would object to calling any person a "hoplophobe". But we both know that all kinds of name calling goes on every day. Recently, I observed that feminist editors are not actually being systematically purged from Misplaced Pages, and got called a misogynist by some random person who made no attempt to learn anything about me as a person. They didn't look at my edits or article work in the area of women's biographies, for example. I let the insult go, like water off a duck's back. I recommend the same strategy to you. I didn't mention "sock" and again apologize for confusing you with another editor. Cullen Let's discuss it 06:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Cullen. After my recent experience with such uncivil editors at GSL, I am a bit touchy, considering there seems to be no recourse for me other than to just "give up" for a while. Please accept my apology as well. Darknipples (talk) 06:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The best recourse is to work on other topics. Though this may be your primary interest here, surely there are other things that interest you also. We have, for example, many articles on guns and similar topics that greatly need expansion, if you know where to find good references for them DGG ( talk ) 03:42, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

WP:DE

There is an editor that is making (what I consider to be) offensive and off-topic questions/remarks/edits on the TP. I have already spoken to them on their personal talk page about it, but they do not seem to care. What should I do? Darknipples (talk) 23:48, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Note - Topic replicated and covered above in section "Possible WP:UNCIVIL". ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 06:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Create an article

Hi I am writing articles about former football players . Can anyone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.190.120 (talk) 20:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm willing to. What help do you need?Save Draft (talk) 08:40, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Het, Is there an Article in Misplaced Pages that lists some of the flaws and mistakes that were made by scholarly and academic groups

He y, is there a page within Wiki that shows and points out the flaws, errors and mistakes as well as unintentional bias and distortions accidently made by (resources that are often accurate and be giving a neutral point of view), like universities and professors (toward a certain country, ethnic group or continent - (for example a peer-reviewed study on a topic is carried out by a large group of universities in a single continent or country and upon subjects from a single country, continent or ethnic group) from scholarly and academic groups, reliable and notable magazines, books (such as books published by university presses), scholarly and scientific journals, and educational films and lectures from universities? what if there isn't. I think a list could be made on this, if there s not already a page abon this for here. Thankyou very. Frogger48 (talk) 04:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Frogger48. I have not seen such an article, and I seriously doubt that such a thing would be possible. The nature of progress is to replace one understanding with newer, more accurate ones - over and over as we learn more. In Newton's day, his Laws of Motion represented our best state of knowledge. Later, Einstein changed that with Special Relativity. Then again with General Relativity. Then along came Quantum Mechanics ... you get the idea. Every one of the earlier models could be called "wrong" (although I think "incomplete" may be a more accurate depiction). And the same process takes place in every field of science. And economics. And architecture. And plumbing. And medicine. And ... you get the idea.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:16, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Hey Gronk Oz, personally, I am not being antagonistic here, are you certainly 100% on this? Oh, and do you have universal, genuine evidence to support your claim? That would really help me a lot! Thank you very much, and have a goood day. Frogger48 (talk) 05:02, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Frogger48 I see you and Gronk Oz are addressing different questions. For the sort of thing I think you have in mind see Scientific misconduct, Academic dishonesty, Hoaxes in science, Scientific controversies, Retraction -- with it's list of specific cases, and all the many articles covered listed in the Category Category:Scientific misconduct. DGG ( talk ) 03:52, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Page View Statistics

Anybody here know what's wrong with this extension? I've been using this feature for a long time even before officially joining as editor and it doesn't update regularly as it did before. It's really interesting to view article traffic and how it co-relates to the news cucle of a particular subject. Anybody know when will be fixed? Save Draft (talk) 08:33, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Save Draft! You will need to contact the maintainer of the tool, Henrik, with any problems with the tool. Unfortunately, Henrik has gone mostly inactive (last edit was in August of last year) since c. 2012, and you may not get a response. Anyway, good luck and thanks for your contributions and copy-editing (you may want to join the Guild of Copy Editors). Esquivalience 03:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for being very acommodating and kind! I will surely check out that guild! Thanks again! Save Draft (talk) 03:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Singer qualification

I am just wondering about qualifying as a singer. Does an actor/actress who sand in a film be considered a singer? Take for example Keira Knightley in her film Begin Again, she sings in the film but she's not considered a singer by the media. Rather, she's just considered an actress.Save Draft (talk) 08:44, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Save Draft: I'm afraid you've come to the wrong place: this page is for assistance with editing Misplaced Pages. You might ask at the Entertainment section of the Reference Desk. My personal answer, for what it's worth, is that there's rarely a single answer to an "is X considered a Y" question unless you say who is doing the considering. But somebody who started their career singing and then went into acting is more likely to be considered a singer, while somebody who did the reverse is less likely. Somebody who started in musical theatre, both acting and singing from the start, is more likely to be considered both. --ColinFine (talk) 18:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much ColinFine! I'm sorry for my mistake of posting here. I will refer to that inquiry board you suggested. Again, many thanks!Save Draft (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC)