MyWiki:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 124

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

Archive 120

←

Archive 122

→

Making templates of WP:LUC and WP:42 ?

Another host coming in to ask a question of the friendly assembly here. I know a lot about articles, but very little about templates. There are two unofficial Wikipedia policy-suggestions which I think are great for being phrased clearly and succinctly for novices, but right now they're written out as full-code as so require a cut-paste of many lines of text to add them to a Talk post discussion. I've been doing just that to advise AFC submitters, but typing a simple quick code would be easier.

WP:LUC has this neat box basically explaining "if you write an autobio or article for your company, you might not like it when other editors find negative details and add them"
WP:42 gives the simplest and easiest summary I've seen about Sourcing requirements

Is there some way we could create templates {{luc}} and {{42}} so that folks like Teahouse hosts, AFC reviewers, NPP folks, etc. can be able to quickly offer very simple and clear advice to new submitters? Maybe with the nice big eye-catching text, and a tiny link at the bottom to refer them to the longer version of the policy? MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

the current version

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

{{Wikipedia:42}}|}

So, that's the current version (made with {{Wikipedia:42}}) If you like, I can potentially add some <noinclude> tags to it to help it be shorter? ~Charmlet ^-talk- 02:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible to just have the big highlighted bits display, and the explanatory text either be a dropdown, or else just be linked to it? That way there's just one big block of big letter and highlighting to draw the readers eye. Thanks for the help! MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:20, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see what you're suggesting, that code just displays the whole page/section, right? But can we make it an actual Template like Template:Peacock? Just the big-bold-highlighted part. Or if you have advice on how one goes about making a template without screwing up the coding I'm willing to take a shot at it. MatthewVanitas (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Priority of inter-language links

Hi there,
I'm currently working on the article about Robert Schumann and trying to get it up to GA/FA standard. At the end of "early life" (the first subsection of Biography) there's a link to the German Wikipedia in the article body, with a less specific link to an English article in brackets afterwards, written as "(see also: Corps)". Is it ok to have the links set up like this, and if not which one should I keep? Jackc143 (talk) 08:18, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Greetings Jack and welcome to the teahouse. I looked and couldn't find a specific policy about articles in multiple languages. Which doesn't mean there isn't one I just didn't find one with my quick look. So in situations like that I just rely on common sense and what an average user would expect. IMO it is very unintuitive to link to an article in a different language. If that article provided some critical information and it was only available in German then I would say make an exception and use it but if I'm understanding you correctly there is an English version of the article already. In that case I would change the link and go to the English version. I actually don't see the reason for a link to the article in German at all, if someone wants it in German they can navigate to the German site or try an auto-translation. Again, if there is something really special about that article in German then perhaps leave that as a see also link but my opinion based on what you've said would be just get rid of the link to the German article completely and link to the English one. Mdebellis (talk) 12:31, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

What it is is that there's a more specific article in German and a less specific one in English. You're probably right in that it's not very good to link to a foreign language article in the body, I'll remove it. Thanks, Jackc143 (talk) 14:52, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Music and Lyrics

Hi -- I recently expanded the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Music and Lyrics, using the official Emmy website and the Internet Movie Database's listing of Emmy Awards and nominations as sources. Checkingfax flagged the new version with {{copypaste}} and {{self-published}} and suggested coming here for a second opinion.

I understand the issue of using self-published sources, which is why I also used a third-party source, the IMDb. (Also, the IMDb's award listings are not as generally editable by users as their movie listings are.)

So, any second opinions on all this? Trivialist (talk) 03:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't look like a copyright violation to me, and I think both sources look appropriate. This page may be relevant, and it specifically states 'information [in compilations and lists] is usable but only if presentation and selection are significantly altered', I had a look at both pages and none of the information is presented in a way similar to the article. The same page also states that 'Copyright does not protect facts, but it does protect opinion', surely the list of winners is fact?

On the subject of using self-published sources, I think Wikipedia's guildeline is mainly referring to individuals publishing information - it talks about 'books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs, Internet forum postings, and tweets', this is not appropriate for an official site, which is a primary source. Wikipedia's guideline on this is that while it is preferable to use third-party sources, 'primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia'. However, it is not a good idea to base an entire article on a primary sources, which is why you have cited IMDb. If you can, I'd also try to find articles in news publications on the awards, which will generally be more reliable sources. This does not mean that the official website cannot be cited though.

I don't profess to be an expert on Wikipedia's copyright policy - I read up on it when I need to, but if you really want an expert opinion the best place to go is the reliable sources noticeboard. I'm not particularly impressed with Checkingfax, not only did he point you in the wrong direction (the Teahouse is mainly designed for new users) but it looks like he may not have had a proper understanding of Wikipedia's policies before tagging that article. Thankyou for your patience with the issue, Jr8825 • Talk 09:30, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Trivialist (talk) 15:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

whats the purpose of motogp riders puting there legs out when braking for corners

when motogp riders brake or slow down to come into a corner they put there legs out,i was wondering i anyone could explain this, i know its not because they are scared of falling of, is it maybe to add traction to the rear wheel,or does it help the in slowing down therefore less front brake — Preceding unsigned comment added by 105.236.73.25 (talk) 12:41, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is a forum for discussing how to help edit and improve Wikipedia. For general questions such as this, you may want to ask at the Reference Desks. Thanks. --13:54, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Help with copyright

Hey,

I just published my first article(Edwin Bakker). I thought it was still a userpage but I somehow already published it (is it true that I cannot reverse that?). It was however not entirely finished, I copied the first lines from another website so I got a copyright notice. Now it's changed although the first sentences are still the same. But that's clearly very factual information. How could I rewrite that he's professor in A, works at B. etc? This only applies to the first paragraph. I hope that someone could check if the article is in accordance with the copryight rules now so the notice can be removed. Any advice would be welcome.

Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeanine de Roy van Zuijdewijn (talk • contribs) 13:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Jeanine de Roy van Zuijdewijn,

Plagarism (see WP:Plagarism) is not permitted on Wikipedia, whether it be on your user space or Wikipedia in general. You will need to take off that material (completely) from Wikipedia and rewrite the article in your own words (see WP:Paraphrase). Let me know if you need any further help. --JustBerry (talk) 13:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your fast reply, I understand that plagiarism is not allowed. That's why I changed the article, except for the sentences that "

Edwin Bakker is professor of (Counter-)Terrorism Studies at the Institute of Public Administration and director of the Centre for Terrorism and Counterterrorism (CTC) of Leiden University. Bakker is also a fellow of the International Centre for Counter Terrorism – The Hague. He is a member of the editorial board of the quarterlies Security and Human Rights, the Journal of Strategic Security, and Vrede & Veiligheid (Peace & Security). "

I don't see how I can rephrase that. I can only change the order? Edwin Bakker is director of the Centre for Terrorism and Counterterrorism (CTC) of Leiden University - Campus The Hague and professor of (Counter-)Terrorism Studies at the Institute of Public Administration of that same university. He also holds the position of research fellow at the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism in the Hague and he is a member of the editorial board of the following (academic)journals: Security and Human Rights, the Journal of Strategic Security, and Vrede & Veiligheid (Peace & Security)."

Would that be sufficient?

Thanks again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeanine de Roy van Zuijdewijn (talk • contribs) 13:47, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Any help over new article please!

article denied

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Amzingrl/Pauline_Nordin my article was denied comment was:

Comment: The majority of the references provided were written by Nordin herself. This does not help establish notability. Please provide more 3rd party reliable sources. RadioFan

I tried to contact the editor on this and talk with him over the facts that alot of the resources were not written by her, if he'd would look at the articles, hence the different names for sources. I am able to add more referencing now, which I can do, but it seems this article has plenty and nothing fabricated.

I would like to add that a previous article over her was approved with much less located here:

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Nordin

Please help, I would like this article to be added, she's a notable fitness instructor, athlete and more. I have noticed many articles here on wiki about weight lifters, competitors, etc that I had looked at prior to starting this article, with much less referencing that some were highly questionable for one for notability. Amzingrl (talk) 18:41, 2 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amzingrl (talk • contribs)

How do I edit to make more acceptable for Wik? and how do I post positive comments?

I have used Wikipedia for years now, and I think it is the best thing around. I donate regularly. I have posted my one contribution... "Fractional Currency Shield", because it apparently was unknown to the world at large, although known to all us Fractional collectors. On the listing it says that it may be removed because of incomplete content. How can I clean it up and make it bombproof? I have a shield, and hope to post a picture sometime, but have not figured that out yet. Not for sale... Sorry. Lee Radarcarve (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Radarcarve, and thanks for asking. I recommend you read WP:Your first article, to get an idea of what we look for in an article. I agree that the topic sounds as if it should be notable; but ideally you should find more than one source for it, and should reference all the specific information in the article to particular places in the source, rather than one catch-all reference at the end. (The reason is that Wikipedia being free for anybody to edit, it is important that the reader who is concerned to get the facts right can find out from the article where to go to check what the article says).

As for positive comments, I'm not sure what you mean. Wikipedia is not a social networking site, and so does not have 'like' buttons. But if you appreciate what somebody has done, you can leave them a message - or a cookie or a barnstar - on their talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Lee and welcome to the Teahouse! The article Fractional Currency Shield is currently not being considered for deletion. However the messages at the top of the article are alerts to say there are some problems with the article.

Firstly, your article is what we call an Orphan, which means no other pages on Wikipedia link to it. The network of wikilinks is what helps people navigate the encylopedia, so it is important articles link to each other. You seem to have some expertise in this area, so please do go to articles you would expect to have links to Fractional Currency Shield and add them. The source code for doing this is quite simple, and can be found at Help:Wikilinks#Wikilinks. If you are using the Visual Editor, this should hopefully be relatively straightforward. Be bold in adding links! No-one owns articles on Wikipedia, whether you created an article or not, you have just as much right to edit it as the next editor. Errors are easy to reverse, and if you need help, please come straight back here :)

The second issue with Fractional Currency Shield is a more general one. We use the term "needing cleanup" to mean general problems with the article. The most major issue is that the article contains no references. Wikipedia aims to have all of its content verifiable to an external reliable source. We don't want articles to contain any original research. Our main way of doing this is by adding inline citations for each asserted fact. May I point you towards Help:Referencing for beginners?

Otherwise, all articles on Wikipedia are a work in progress, so don't worry if this article isn't perfect yet. Your desire to improve Wikipedia is a great one, keep it up! ;) Please let us at the Teahouse know if we can be of any help to you in this. Cheers, --LukeSurl^{t c} 22:49, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

How do you change link colors?

How do you do it? CakeRox (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

To change link colors, you do (with the double brackets) {Font color|color|[link]}. Hope that helped. :) --Phoenix Fire ^contribs 21:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Another option, a bit longer however, is to do <span style="color:ADDCOLORHERE"> Colored text </span> -- ^(T)Numbermaniac_(C) 03:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

However, you should not perform either of the above options in articles. If, maybe, you are asking about changing link colors only so that you see them differently, you can do this with all modern browsers, but it depends on the browser. In Firefox, for example:

• Firefox menu →
• Preferences →
• Content tab →
• Colors button →
• Change the colors for "Unvisited Links" and "Visited Links" to whatever you'd like →
• Untick the box for "Allow pages to choose their own colors, instead of my selections above".

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:29, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

CVU Graduate

I would like to take the CV training program. How can I do to take it? Miss Bono^[zootalk]^☆ 16:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Miss Bono. You can find out about the Counter-Vandalism Unit Academy at shortcut WP:CVUA. Good luck! Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

What happened to my user page?

I logged on to wikipedia today to find my user page and user talk page deleted. I looked at the requests for deletion page and other deletion related pages, but I couldn't find anything about who deleted my page. As far as I can see, there was nothing wrong with either of my pages. Can you find out who deleted my pages, and see if you could restore them as they were? Thanks!-Badger2424 (talk)Badger2424 (talk) 15:45, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

They are still there. Your user page is at User:Badger2424, and your user talk page is at User talk:Badger2424. I've double-checked and you have no deleted contributions, which means that no page you have ever contributed to has been deleted. There is also no entry in the deletion log for either page, which means they were not deleted and then subsequently restored. I think you must've been looking in the wrong place. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 15:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the teahouse. I see nothing wrong with your user page. Everything seems to be in the right place. I also checked its History and nothing seemed to be wrong. Miss Bono^[zootalk]^☆ 15:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Need suggestions for citations of Notablity

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Toru_Oba&oldid=564359544 Hi I wrote my first article and I am having difficulty establishing notability. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.Jay.ivey (talk) 14:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Jay. You need to find reliable independent sources - such as newspapers and magazines, or scholarly journals - that discuss the subject in some depth. They don't have to be online or in English (though if they are, this makes things easier), as long as there is enough information for a reader to find the reference, say by going to a library. If you cannot find such references, then the subject is not currently notable, and there may not be an article in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Jay, I am rather glad you asked this for a number of reasons, I will attempt to answer your questionb with a few examples. IF a person got a college degree and is the manager of the bus depot in a small town, NOT a notable person. HOWEVER, if the bus depot was the scene of some huge disaster that wipes out an entire town AND it was the managers fault, NOW the person is notable. If the person sang with a famous rock group because the drummer collapsed from a drug OD, and they sprang up from the audience and played the person from the audience is NOT notable. BUT if the guy from the audience who did that became a famous rock group member, YES, they are notable. Notability is governed well by wiki definition, BUT it must be used with a dose of realism as the literal interpretation can lerad down the path of confusion.Coal town guy (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

create a page about Alejandra Amarilla Nash regarding her documentary, "Landfil Harmonic"

I wanted a page created for Alejandra, but getting contributions of others. She is the x wife of basketball star Steve Nash and in Wiki is only known as that. Her contribution in producing this documentary about children in her home country of Paraguay making musical instruments out of trash and creating an orchestra needs to be known. I can copy/paste newspaper articles and give the author, like Evan Triantafilidis for The Republic/azcentral.com on 7-13-2013. Perhaps others would join in with some of Alejandra's history that isn't just about Steve Nash. Is there enough room here to paste that article? User ID Larsripstop184.101.1.57 (talk) 21:03, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Lars, and welcome to the Teahouse. I was impressed by that documentary, and I think it is very likely that the producer meets the "notability" test to have an article about her in Wikipedia: your mentioning that you have newsaper articles about her confirms that.

Are you willing to have a go at writing the article? If so, I recommend you look at the WP:Article wizard, which will help you get started, and create the article in a place where you can work on it until you think it is ready for review. If not, you could that somebody else write an article at WP:Requested articles. I might be sufficiently interested to have a go myself; but if you could tell me the sources you have found, that would be helpful (again, don't copy the source, but put the information that will help me find it on my talk page, Talk:ColinFine.

One important point is that you should not paste articles from newspapers into Wikipedia, as that is a copyright violation. What we do instead is to 'cite' the article, with bibliographic information so that the readers could find it if they wanted to. If the source (newspaper) is available online, so much the better, and we give a link as part of the citation; but that is not essential. --ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, there are some limited circumstances in which content from newspapers can be copied to Wikipedia. These are 1) You wrote the newspaper content yourself and are willing to release it under this license, 2) it was written before 1923 or 3) The author grants permission to use the newspaper content under the aforementioned license. ^King Jakob _C2 22:54, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure this doesn't need to be said, but if you can only follow Colin's advice and King Jakob's doesn't apply, you summarize the article in your own words.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

request about new article

I have created an article vithal venkatesh kamath. plz verify and suggest necessary changes Svpnikhil (talk) 13:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Although I would be delighted to help, did you submit your article to WP:AfC before simply publishing the article onto the Wikipedia main space? If not, I would suggest doing so. If you have, please link me to the article. --JustBerry (talk) 13:40, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

JustBerry, I think this is the article: Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Vithal_Venkatesh_Kamath. I replied to an earlier question by Svpnikhil on this, its a few questions down just fyi. Mdebellis (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome back to the teahouse Svpnikhil. To start with I would strongly encourage you to get more experience as a Wikipedia editor before you try to create a new article. There is a lot you can do on Wikipedia without creating new articles. I was an editor for well over three years before I created my first new article. You can add references, clean up text, etc. But if you still want to create a new article the place to start is this article: Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation Keep in mind that Wikipedia is run almost entirely by people like you and me who are just volunteers and at times you may need to wait for a while to get feedback on your new article. That is one reason I suggest making some more basic edits to existing articles first, it will get you more experience with the way Wikipedia works. I took another quick look at your article -- I'm assuming its this one: Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Vithal_Venkatesh_Kamath You still don't have references that I can see and the question of wp:notability is still a big issue. Here is an example of someone who is similar to the subject of your article and what a published article for such a person looks like Conrad_Hilton. Mdebellis (talk) 14:05, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Now I have added references. Next what else to do for ur acceptanceSvpnikhil (talk) 14:14, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

One more time the Teahouse is not the place to review an article for submission. I looked at the wp:afc page (have you looked at that page yet?) and it seems the next step in the process is to put the following code at the top of your article: "{{subst:submit}}" I did that for you. There is now a notice on that page describing that the article is under review and you will be notified within about a week or two of the next steps. good luck. Mdebellis (talk) 14:34, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Well we got feedback pretty quickly. The article was declined. I received the feedback since I put the notification for submission on the article. I'm going to copy the response from my talk page to yours. You need to follow the steps in that message. Again my advice is to not follow up on creating any new articles until you have more experience doing more basic editing. Mdebellis (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I have made corrections which u recommended. Added 8 links and 4 references. Deleted citations of blogs ,added News paper articles as much as I Have opportunity to fetch on Internet. Uploaded 2 photoes. Please can u tell me the reason why u declined. Svpnikhil (talk) 18:28, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Wrong editing

Shahrukh Khan has decided that the names of his actresses will apear before him in film credits. Chennai Express is the first such movie. I have added reference but someone keeps interfering with the text unnecessarily, wht do i do? aish.ego (talk) 11:42, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Aish. The first things to try is to document the issue on the article Talk page and try contacting the other user directly to work something out. But if that doesn't work then you probably need to check out wp:dispute resolution Good luck! Mdebellis (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The user even does not have an ID probably. Only the computer IP address is shown!! aish.ego (talk) 01:19, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The edit was made not by an IP editor but by Bollyjeff who explained that editor's opinion that this does not belong in the lead section of the article. The editor moved the information into the body of the article, and cut two references to one. This all seems reasonable to me. If you disagree, discuss the matter on the talk page, and let Bollyjeff know. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey i am talking about the page "Chennai Express" and not shahrukh khan. thanx. please look again at the matter aish.ego (talk) 16:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Image Uploading Question

Hello,

I am super new to the Wikipedia editing world, I got into it because I am interning for a non-profit organization helping out with their online presence. I am trying to add a picture to two pages, 'Michael Shifter' and the 'Inter-American Dialogue' pages, both pictures which I am allowed to use by ownership from the Dialogue.

I'd appreciate any help possible! Thank you in advance. DialogueFan2013 (talk) 21:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to Wikipedia! If you do have ownership of the photos and the copyright is yours, it's fine to upload it as lng as you are willing to release it under certain licenses. You can go to WP:UPLOAD for that. But before you do that, please do look at WP:COI as you have a confict of interest as you are interning for the subject of the article. Please write in a nuetral and in a non advertisement way. Regards, Hallows ^AG (talk) 23:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

But to add to what Hallows said: "which I am allowed to use by ownership from the Dialogue" is not enough. What is required in order to use these pictures in Wikipedia is for the copyright owner (which may be the Dialogue, but may be eg a photographer) to explicitly license them under one of the licences which Wikipedia accepts (which allow them to be reused for any purpose, commercial or not). The procedure they must follow is explained at WP:Donating copyright materials. Once the form has been received, you can upload the pictures to Wikimedia commons (so that the may be used on any of the language Wikipedias) and add them to the articles; see WP:Picture tutorial for details of that. --ColinFine (talk) 00:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Hallows and ColinFine, thank you so much!! I did read about the COI and actually edited and added to the existing pages keeping it neutral and non-advertising. The purpose really is to provide information, seeing as the pages were so limited and there was very few information! I was able to add a picture to Wikipedia commons, but now I cannot find it when I try to actually add it to the page. Here's the link, I'd appreciate any help, and thanks again for your guidance already! Here's the image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Michael_2009.JPG

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DialogueFan2013 (talk • contribs) 15:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Was anyone able to read my reply? Any help is greatly appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DialogueFan2013 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

No comments showing below a certain line on a talk page

At Talk:International Society of Genetic Genealogy comments below a certain line are not showing. Is this a form of protectionism? You need to edit to see what I am talking about because nothing shows below section 10 on the talk page. Curious! Jrcrin001 (talk) 17:23, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jrcrin001, that wasn't page protection, someone just forgot to add </ref> at the end of a reference, so the rest of the page was treated as if it was just a citation. It looks like it's been fixed now. Jr8825 • Talk 05:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

It is those darn marks my older eyes can't see as well these days ... Thanks! Jrcrin001 (talk) 07:05, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand the answer to my question. In fact, I can't tell if my question was answered.

WECAN SOCIETY

please create this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.227.145.50 (talk) 08:37, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi there and welcome to Wikipedia! This is a place for editors to ask questions about editing and Wikipedia in general - if you want to request an article, the place to go is here. Before going there though, you must make sure that the article you are requesting meets Wikipedia's inclusion guidelines. Cheers, Jr8825 • Talk 09:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

wiki spirit crushed

XLinkbot versus www.tewl.wikia.com

attempted discussion >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:XLinkBot#Transepidermal_water_loss

diff > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transepidermal_water_loss&diff=next&oldid=558322393

(don't bother if you only have a few minutes to understand)

78.145.245.53 (talk) 14:03, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

If you are unable to reach consensus, then please continue to follow the dispute resolution procedure. But note that overdramatising the situation ("wiki spirit crashed") may not win you much support. --ColinFine (talk) 23:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Editing my newly uploaded page

I want to insert an URL I had forgotten, add a new reference & upload 2 photos. I think I know how to do these things. My question is this: once done & saved, my edits won't replace the existing page immediately without a moderator first checking I have not stuffed it up. Is this correct please? Thanks.Baruinga (talk) 03:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Baruinga, and welcome to the Teahouse. To answer your question: No, as soon as you save an edit, it becomes active. That is, every edit becomes visible to all people as soon as you save it, even if you messed it up. However, as all former edits are saved, you (or anyone else) can always "undo" an edit if it is a mess. Simply click the "View History" tab on any article where you messed something up, and click the "undo" link next to the time and date of the edit you made, and it will return the article to the state it was in before. Does that help answer your questions? --Jayron32 03:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Phew! ThanksBaruinga (talk) 05:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

access deleted page?

Is there any way I can edit my submission that has been declined for copyright violation, so that I can resubmit or has it been deleted and gone forever? Thrive1102 (talk) 01:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Same way you submitted it, only without the violation. --Phoenix Fire ^contribs 01:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse, Thrive1102. It is technically possible for admins to give you a WP:REFUND, but they almost certainly won't because to do so would be copyright infringement, which is illegal where the wikimedia servers are based (and probably where you are too). The only exception I can imagine to this is if you own the copyright and you go through the Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials process. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

The edit history of your AFC draft allows you to go back to an earlier version, and from there you can delete the part which is a copyright violation. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:44, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Timescale for article evaluation

Hi there, Submitted a revised article on 10 July with minor alterations to heading size on 15 July. What's the likely timescale for this revised contribution to be evaluated? Thanks. Stoneraise (talk) 16:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your question. In order to have your page reviewed, you need to hit Resubmit at the top of page. The amount of time it will take for review often depends on the number of articles awaiting review, but sometimes a helpful editor here will review it for you ahead of time if you ask nicely. : ) I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Have resubmitted.Stoneraise (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Looking for someone that can ban someone

The user 204.39.37.185 has been vandalizing pages and he needs to be banned. Can anyone here with a high rank ban him? Pokebub22 (talk) 16:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Here is his/her contributions: [1] Pokebub22 (talk) 16:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Pokebub, thanks for the heads up and it has been dealt with. If you want to report any similar action again the place to do it is at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. NtheP (talk) 17:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I created a wiki article last week called "Rahway Arts District"

I created a wiki article last week called "Rahway Arts District" however when i logged in today to continue editing it, i could not seem to find it. How would I find out if it was deleted and the process to get it back?Rahway Arts Distric (talk) 14:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't believe you ever created it. It doesn't show on your contributions, or when I searched the page, it was never created or deleted. Did you click the save page button? --Phoenix Fire ^contribs 15:05, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. [2] shows you tried to create it but was stopped by a filter. Your username indicates a possibly conflict of interest. I have created a draft version at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Rahway Arts District but it's currently poorly suited for submission. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Donghak Peasant Revolution

Donghak Peasant Revolution failed GA review here. Although User:Khazar2 did note the biggest problem was copyediting, one of the other issues were "The article appears to rely heavily on website sources." I did remove the 2 quotes from the Korean Wikipedia and 3 sources from Naver Blog. and replace them with encyclopedia sources. However, out of the current 79 sources in the article, 33 are online and 46 are offline. So 58% of the references are offline, and just 42% are web sources, so the majority of the sourcing is offline. So, my question is; what should be the percentage of online sources in the article Donghak Peasant Revolution to pass a GA review?--Seonookim (What I've done so far) (I'm busy here) (Tell me your requests) 06:34, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Seonookim, there may be a misunderstanding here. My full comment was "The article appears to rely heavily on website sources. It's difficult for me to judge the reliability of some of the Korean sites, but are you confident that these have the reputation for editorial oversight and factchecking required by the reliable sources policy? The Korean Wikipedia certainly does not qualify as a reliable source for the enormous dialogue quotation." I meant for you to focus on the latter two sentences--are all these sites reliable?--rather than the first. Remember that publications need a reputation for editorial oversight and factchecking, which at least some of the web sources you were using didn't have. Good luck in revising! -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:17, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Seonookim. In answer to your specific question, there is no requirement that any sources either be online or not be online. The more sources that are online, the easier it is for readers to check them, but an article with many references to books that are not online is perfectly fine, as long as the books are from reputable publishers. The only point about the web is that there are huge numbers of websites that are not considered reliable, compared to the number which are reliable. --ColinFine (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I took out ko.wikipedia.org and the blogs and changed them to Doopedia and Naver Enc. So I shouldn't worry about that part anymore?--Seonookim (What I've done so far) (I'm busy here) (Tell me your requests) 05:54, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Adding a "link from" to erase ORPHAN status

I created a wiki article for my friend and she has asked if I can add a link to her page from her publisher's page - to stop the orphan status. (Bernadette Pajer) but I'm unclear how to do that after reading the link to instructions I found at the top of the article. For example, her publisher has a page (Poisoned Pen Press) - do we ask them to edit their Wiki page? Or can I edit their page? Jelafi17 (talk) 04:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

If the article about the publisher has a list of their published authors, then of course you can add that link to that page. It is not "their" page to control in any way. It is an article on a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. You are entirely free to edit that article, or any of of the 4,282,478 articles on this encyclopedia, as long as you do so in compliance with our policies and guidelines. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Jelafil. If you haven't already read our policy on conflict of interest, you should do so. All three of you (Bernadette Pajer, Poisoned Pen Press, and you) are discouraged from editing either of those articles, and if you do so, you should make sure that you do so only in accordance with that policy. --ColinFine (talk) 13:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

And this is kind of nit picking but I wanted to say that while I understand the impulse adding a link to a page to "stop the orphan status" is IMO not what a good editor does. Its putting the cart before the horse, the reason to add a link to an article is that that article is relevant to the thing you are linking from and adding the link will improve Wikipedia. It sounds like in this case the link makes sense anyway but just wanted to point that out. Mdebellis (talk) 20:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

How do I search?

How can I find all good articles with a certain string in it? The instructions at help didn't work Help:search and the guy at the other desk didn't know how. 142.161.147.7 (talk) 01:47, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, you might be able to do this with Google. "Good article" (in quotes) should finds articles with {{good article}} in their text, plus some string in quotes, site:en.wikipedia.org to target this site and maybe a few excluders to get rid of possible results from the wrong namespaces, like -intitle:talk & -intitle:user Let's try something random that's not likely to have too many results: <"good article" "in 1433" site:en.wikipedia.org -intitle:talk -intitle:user> Yep, it works, with one Wikipedia namespace false positive – I'm not sure how to get rid of the Wikipedia namespace because all article URLs have "wikipedia" in their title – but that's easy to work around. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Adding -WP to the search will get rid of most wikipedia: namespace articles, since they generally contain a hatnote or a see also to a WP: shortcode, and articles generally don't. It works on the search linked above. MChesterMC (talk) 10:16, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

what to do about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:John

'User:John' keeps undoing edits to the Multiple Intelligences page that are valid edits and making false accusations about personal opinion when no opinions were given in the article and no citation required to correct NPOV issues. Many people have cited neutral point of view on the Talk page but John does not allow the needed correction to take place . . . what do we do about 'User:John'?Stmullin (talk) 23:34, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stmullin, and welcome. I do not understand the content of the article, however I have reviewed the talk page discussion and the editor is asking you to provide sources to support an argument. This seems to be a reasonable request. It also appears that the content dispute is between the two of you. I recommend you continue the discussion at the talk page and seek consensus. There are dispute resolution options available to you if you can't reach agreement. I hope this has been of some help to you. Flat Out let's discuss it 00:11, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Stmullin. I have looked through the page's history, and I don't see that John has a history of undoing the edits of others. I do see that he undid a group of edits in which you placed many different tags in the article. Now I see that you have added the same citation to the titles of many of the sections instead of adding the citations after the sentences that they support, and that John is helpfully moving them to the appropriate places. —Anne Delong (talk) 01:08, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Conversations about the Eiffel tower, Yeti's, and use of references without reading them is not something I consider appropriate for that page. Stmullin (talk) 18:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi. I'm not sure if this is the right place, but I need help with an article. The article is Barry Engel. First of all, I can't find any basic biographical information like his age. He wrote one book and there are claims that he was mentioned in notable news websites and magazines. My argument is there are no reliable sources that are independent to verify this. He hasn't won any major awards. I'm wondering if he meets WP:BIO. I nominated the article at AFD; the link to the discussion is here. So far there are 2 !votes to delete and 1 !vote by the creator of the page for keep. Thank you. ~~JHUbal27 03:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, JHUbal27. You have handled things right. You doubted notability, looked for sources, and nominated it at Articles for Deletion. The debate is now underway. What further help do you need? I would offer you a caution that raising the same issue in several places can be criticized as "forum shopping", so I encourage you to let the debate play out at AfD, which is exactly where the discussion belongs. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Is an experienced editor available who could make an addition to a Wiki topic?

In the Wikipedia entry for Reb Anderson there is a picture of him with some personal data listed below, including his wife and daughter. Reb has two daughters. Only one is listed. His second daughter's name is Deborah Savran. Could someone enter it or explain to me how to enter it? I could not find an edit button for that section of the entry. Rebassistant (talk) 23:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Done Checkingfax (talk) 23:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse. Another editor has done the edit. The answer as to how it is done was given in response to your earlier question at WP:Help desk#Editing a box or table that doesn't have an edit button.. - David Biddulph (talk) 23:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help! Rebassistant (talk) 23:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Here's what I added:

<br>Deborah Savran

I added it in the "view source" section.

Checkingfax (talk) 23:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

ISBN bot?

Couldn't seem to get Teahouse interface to work so thought I'd try there--Is there a bot or other expedited way to add in ISBNs to Wikipedia page reference listings? SarahPML (talk) 19:32, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Question added from my talk page as the "Ask my question" button above was not working for user. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 20:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Ahhh, yes, I copied the tildes in the directions below rather than type them out. Didn't enable the "add my response" button from a copy and paste, but did from direct typing out of the tildes. SarahPML (talk) 21:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Sarah. See User:Citation bot/use for one. (Reflinks is also a good, related tool but I don't think it adds ISBNs.) Universal reference formatter supposedly will add an ISBN if you supply it with a URL or other identifying information but never works for me, just scrolls forever, and it's manual rather than actively working on existing pages. Wikipedia Citation Tool for Google Books works well and will scrape the ISBN and properly hyphenate it but is also manual and is limited to books found through Google Books or a preexisting citation containing such URL pointing there (always check its output; it does dumb things like all automated programs; also, a lot of these tools are set up wrong, such as defaulting to providing the accessdate, which should not be given for paper resources like books and digitized versions of paper newspaper articles). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Text over image

How can I set up an image in a page and add text over it? Trying to do so here: User:Miss_Bono/U2_Albums Miss Bono^[zootalk]^☆ 16:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Miss Bono-- I'm not actually sure that using standard wiki markup to add text over images is possible nor can it be done using acceptable HTML mark-up on Wikipedia. Can anyone else chime in? I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 19:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I, Jethrobot :) I've seen that kind of things on people's guestbook, I don't know how they do it. User:Belugaboy/guestbook Miss Bono^[zootalk]^☆ 19:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Hah! You can just call me Jethro. It looks like HTML actually can work in this case, I just wasn't thinking very imaginatively. Here's the code based on their userpage:

Extended content

 
<div style="position: relative; margin: 0 -1em; padding: 0; background-color: transparent; border: 1px none #ddd; height: 1%;">
<div style="position: relative; margin: 0 auto; width: 1100px; border: 1px solid #4E562C; box-shadow:0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -moz-box-shadow:0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -webkit-box-shadow:0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); height: 1%;">
<div style="position: relative; overflow: hidden; height: 800px;"><!-- Height of the main image -->
<div style="position: relative; overflow: hidden; margin: 0;">[[<!--FILE NAME HERE-->]]</div>
</div> 
<div style="position: absolute; top: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%;">
<div style="margin: 1em; font-size: 100%;">
</div>

<center><big><!--IMAGE DESCRIPTION HERE--></big></center>
<center>
== Autographs ==

<!--Please put signatures at the BOTTOM of the list! Thank You!-->
<!--Please put your signature DIRECTLY above this line! Please do not tamper with the lines. -->
</center>
</div>
</div> 
</div>
</div> 
</div>

Try that out with an image and see what happens. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 19:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Jeth. Your name reminds me of him. Miss Bono^[zootalk]^☆ 20:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

free agent link, is something wrong with it?

Hi to all, i was looking the article Tommaso Rocchi and the first sentence includes the topic free agent, which does not appear as a link although it exists, but rather literally "...[[free agent]]." Can someone have a look?

Thanks Mondiad (talk) 16:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. The reason for it appearing as "...[[free agent]]." was that there were <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags surrounding it. I've removed them. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:41, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Citations (citing sources)

In this article Troy Yocum there are several cite sources that occur in mid sentence. If my memory serves me correctly cites are always suppose to appear at the end of a sentence. Correct?TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 13:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Not necessarily. It's often useful to have your footnote immediately after the fact it supports, even if that is mid-sentence. The way Troy Yocum is referenced inline looks OK to me. --LukeSurl^{t c} 14:00, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmmmm, ok. I thought at one time (when i was newer), when I was adding a source to an article I was told not to put them in the middle. I guess my memory has failed me.TattØØdẄaitre§ lĖTŝ tÅLĶ 14:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm a new editor so take what I say with that in mind but in my limited experience few things in Wikipedia are cast in stone. So its possible someone said that and also IMO they aren't completely wrong. Here is something I found in the wp:manual of style. In the section Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Inline_citations

"As in the above example, citation markers are normally placed after adjacent punctuation such as periods and commas. For exceptions, see the Punctuation and footnotes section of the Manual of Style. Note also that no space is added before the citation marker.

The citation should be added close to the material it supports, offering text–source integrity. If a word or phrase is particularly contentious, an inline citation may be added next to that word or phrase within the sentence, but it is usually sufficient to add the citation to the end of the sentence or paragraph, so long as it's clear which source supports which part of the text. If an infobox or table contains text that needs citing, but the box or table cannot incorporate an inline citation, the citation should appear in a caption or other text that discusses the material."

My reading of this is usually refs go at the end of a sentence after punctuation but in special circumstances they should go directly next to some text they support or that is contentious. Mdebellis (talk) 14:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Your interpretation is correct.--ukexpat (talk) 14:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Here's how I handle this issue: If the source cited supports the entire sentence or paragraph, I place the citation at the end of that sentence or paragraph. But if a sentence has two clauses, and the source only verifies a specific detail in the first clause, then I will place the citation at the end of that clause. Often, the remainder of the sentence will be a non-controversial summary of what several previously cited sources say, so I will leave that clause uncited. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:01, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Citing sources#Short citations for an example with several clauses referenced in a single sentence. StarryGrandma (talk) 14:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Exchange between different languages

Hi, as I use the Wikipedia in more than one language and have contributed in German and English I wonder how create links between editions in different languages. When I add ... it only works to the edition I am working at and not to other language editions. Thank you for helping me out. Cheers Vitus — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitus Doerfler (talk • contribs) 17:46, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Vitus. The normal way to create links between different articles in different language Wikipedias by picking "Add links" in the sidebar: it will ask you to enter the language and the title of the article you want to link to, and it will add an entry to the list of 'Languages' in the sidebar. If you want a wikilink in the text to an article in another language, you can use the syntax [[:de:Berlin]] (though you will probably want to pipe it to make the result look better: [[:de:Berlin|Berlin]]. However, before doing this, think carefully about your readers. In most cases, you cannot assume that your readers will be able to read an article in the other language, so what is the value in wikilinking to such an article? --ColinFine (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

How do I upload an article successfully ?

How do I upload an article successfully ?Delwarmrida (talk) 02:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Delwarmrida, welcome to the Teahouse! I highly suggest that you take a look at Wikipedia:Article wizard, an excellent guide to creating a new article. Howicus (talk) 02:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi and welcome. I'm the one sean and I work in the Articles for creation process. After you've created your article, drop me a line on my talk page and I'll take a look at your article, help you with technical stuff, and give you feedback. Thanks, the one sean 03:26, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

How do i nominate an article for speedy deletion?

I 'm trying to nominate the article EKTA NAGAR,MANKHURD for speedy deletion, but I don't know how to. Pokebub22 (talk) 01:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

You do {delete|reason}. --Phoenix Fire ^contribs 01:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

No. He should look at WP:CSD and choose one of the templates there. For what it's worth, I don't think there's a speedy candidate that applies.—Kww(talk) 01:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, thanks, both of you. :) Pokebub22 (talk) 01:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

If you go into your preferences and install Twinkle, you can click the arrow next to "view history" and select CSD. -- ^t numbermaniac^c 03:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Possible copyvio

Hi. I started an AFD discussion for Barry Engel, but now the article has been tagged as a possible copyvio. I looked at the PDF from duplicate detector and sure enough most of the article is plagiarized from the source. This is a stupid question, but should it be speedy deleted under G12 with the ongoing discussion? Thank you. ~~JHUbal27 21:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Not a stupid question at all. It's gone.—Kww(talk) 22:26, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Citation style

My article is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Shetterly It was tagged as needing improvement (better sources), so I added one to the beginning paragraph. Then I added other information I was able to verify with credible sources and also cited those. My problem is that the citation style isn't consistent. I think someone turned my original <ref>-style citation into a tidy [1]-style citation. I'd like all my citations to look like that, but can't figure out how to make that happen or fix what I've already done. I really am NEW at this! TL — Preceding unsigned comment added by TL Scully (talk • contribs) 21:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

My full question got cut off with what looks like a response that it's been fixed. But the problem I was having with my article has not been fixed.

my article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Shetterly

it has two kinds of citations: long www links in the body of the text and one that looks more :like a footnote. i'd like them all to look like footnotes, but don't know how to fix it.

TLTL Scully (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

You had, for some reason, added a variety of nowiki tags which were preventing many of your refs from being treated correctly. Another editor has corrected it for you. - David Biddulph (talk) 21:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

The Visual Editor apparently scatters those nowiki tags broadcast throughout an article if one tries to use wiki syntax to format links or refs or the like. That's the "some reason". Deor (talk) 22:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

If that is so, that's yet another reason for avoiding Visual Editor like the plague. Those who deploy such software without having tested it might reasonably be accused of disruptive editing. - David Biddulph (talk) 22:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

As someone who used to program I want to say a few words in defense of the developers. The software is in beta. And developers like editors make mistakes. Its insulting to say that if a develooper made a mistake that is the equivalent to disruptive editing. And I'm not convinced this was due to the visual editor anyway. I took a look at that file as well and it was a mess and it didn't look like the kind of mess a software program would create. Not that I can tell for sure of course. Mdebellis (talk) 22:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree that blaming the individual developers isn't the right answer. The person to blame is User:Jdforrester (WMF), who refuses to switch Visual Editor off despite the fact that it has received profound negative feedback and is missing fundamental editing tools required for editing Wikipedia articles. Yes, the insertion of the nowiki tags is a known problem with Visual Editor. No, it isn't working well enough to expose inexperienced editors to.—Kww(talk) 23:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

(e/c) I see where you're coming from Mdebellis, but I don't think this is a smear about developers in general, but a reaction to too many actual incidents that have bit a lot of us, and made us hand shy. The problem of developers springing upon the community site wide changes with barely a peep of discussion, then reacting to vast discussions of not just how poorly-tested and poorly thought out the change was (which might have been solved by discussion first), but discussion of how it is a thumb in the eye of the community and what they should have done to avoid lots of hurt feelings and drama, with what can only be summed up as "deal with it" (and then doing it again a few months later), is the cause in my view of some of the sentiment here. At least that's the way I feel. I can tell you specifics if you'd like. I, and I think many people, interpret what we've seen in the past when this happens, as "we don't care about the editing community, we don't value consensus even though it's the foundational ethos of Wikipedia and we will run roughshod over you because we are THE DEVELOPERS.. The visual editor, actually, is a change that I think has been much better advertised than many in the past, but I certainly understand why people have little patience at this point, and react probably more strongly that they would have if they hadn't already learned what to expect from the majority of those doing the changes.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)