• 2605:E000:160F:14E:E5DE:3EE1:F0C3:5070 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Emma Zen Foundation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I would like to start a new section History and Programs do I just add the topics myself? Or is there a way to start a new section professional? Thank you

2605:E000:160F:14E:E5DE:3EE1:F0C3:5070 (talk) 01:54, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't understand your question. You may find Wikipedia:Tutorial helpful. It covers the basics of editing and formatting, such as how to create section headings. Another resource you may find useful is Wikipedia:Your first article, which explains, among other things, how to determine if a topic is suitable for Wikipedia. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:35, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Telegirl7 (talk · contribs)
  • No draft specified!

Telegirl7 (talk) 03:12, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just received the following message. My "effort" has been declined. There already is an article on Malcolm Wakeford. This draft appears to be an effort, probably good-faith, to use AFC to have a substitute version of an article approved in place of the existing article. That isn't what AFC is for. If the changes that you have made to an article have been reverted, and you want them restored, that is a content dispute. Read dispute resolution, and discuss the proposed changes on the article talk page. If discussion is inconclusive, you may request moderated discussion at the dispute resolution noticeboard, or formal mediation by the Mediation Committee, or you may submit a Request for Comments for consensus by the community. If you have any further questions about dispute resolution, you may ask at the Teahouse or the Help Desk.

Yes, it is a substitute article. I created the original article many years ago and it is out of date. I did attempt to update the existing article but was reverted by someone which means the existing article cannot be updated satisfactorily to reflect accurate and update information. Whatever it takes, I believe that the article should be updated. I don't understand how someone without as much knowledge of the subject can make a determination as to it not being approved for upload.

Can you please advise in simple terms, as I am not proficient in editing, how I can update the existing article, written by me to include new and updated information. What is AFC? To fail to allow this to happen is de facto censorship and, from my understanding, outside the purposes and spirit of Wikipedia.

Telegirl7 (talk) 03:12, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Telegirl7. This page is for questions about the Articles for creation process, a mechanism for creating new articles from scratch. Updates to existing articles, if made boldly and reverted, should be discussed on the article talk page, as you have started to do on Talk:Malcolm Wakeford, until consensus is reached. As complex as it may sound, the process works remarkably well, but have patience. --Worldbruce (talk) 15:11, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The mistakes you made were to remove referenced material from the original article without replacing it with better referenced material, then to try to overwrite the existing article. I'm sure that your discussion on the talk page can resolve the problems you have had. Please remember that each statement in the article should be references to a WP:Reliable source. It would be best if you could put aside all of your personal knowledge about the subject. Dbfirs 23:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Telegirl7 - I see that you were operating under two reasonable but incorrect assumptions. The first was that, if someone reverted your edits, the "existing article cannot be updated satisfactorily". If an edit is reverted or disputed, the dispute resolution procedures may seem complicated but are meant to be fair and to encourage cooperation. Please continue to try to discuss on the article talk page. The second was that Articles for Creation can be used to replace existing articles. That is a reasonable guess, but it isn't what AFC is for. I hope that you now understand that you can continue discussion on the article talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:27, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ronpen2379 (talk · contribs)
  • User:Ronpen2379/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I have just submitted my first article for review. In creating the page I was unable to successfully upload a photograph of the subject even though I am the owner of the photograph. I understand that this needs to be accepted by another branch of Wikipedia Commons. The inability to upload an image to Wikipedia Commons is probably because I have only recently been registered. Must I wait for approval before I am allowed to upload visual content. May I seek permission to do so in order to append it to my article under review? Thank you for your assistance.Ronpen2379 (talk) 19:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC) Ronpen2379 (talk) 19:47, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ronpen2379. I'm not aware of any pre-requisites like account age, number of edits, or granted permissions for uploading an image to Wikimedia Commons, but as you say, they're a different branch. I suggest you try the Commons:Upload_Wizard again, then if you get an error message or something doesn't work as described, visit Commons:Help desk and detail the problem for them. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:29, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your response. I already went through the process and found that the background of paintings was probably the issue. I solved it with a different photo. Thanks again. Ronpen2379 (talk) 17:05, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• LilWinner (talk · contribs)
  • User:LilWinner/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

I am having trouble tagging existing Wiki pages on a new page that I've drafted. For example, a Wiki page already exists for the two word term "electrical engineering." Even though I use the Link feature (top left) to create the link, when I look at the page preview, the first word "electrical" disappears from the "published" page, and all you see is "engineering" ... with a link to a "bad link".

Here's how it looks in my unpublished draft form: [engineer]

and a one word term, "entrepreneur" has the word entirely disappear when "published":

[[1]].

What am I doing wrong?? Please help and thank you.

LilWinner (talk) 23:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Internal links do not need the full URL. For example, just link to electrical engineer like this, and to entrepreneur like this. I've fixed the first two links for you. Dbfirs 23:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LilWinner (talk • contribs) 02:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]