Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 December 28

= December 28 =

Using the Wikipedia Open Ticket Request System
I sent an email to [mailto:info-en-q@wikimedia.org info-en-q@wikimedia.org] on 26 December 2007 and received no response. I expected some kind of acknowledgment. Today I found the Wikpedia Open Ticket Request System OTRS. I found it highly confusing as it does not make it clear how to initiate contact. I eventually emailed [mailto:en.ABCD+wikipedia@gmail.com en.ABCD+wikipedia@gmail.com], expecting a Ticket. I still received nothing. What am I doing wrong ? Is my gmail address regarded as spam ? I followed the guidelines on this page. I wrote a short email where I was polite and straight to the point.

Perhaps I am over-reacting but I am becoming increasingly distressed by the complete lack of response from Wikipedia while on the receiving end of invectives and false accusations by an established Wikipedia editor. He/she remains aggressive and uncompromising while hiding behind the safety of his/her pseudonym. Unfortunately, he/she has chosen to make false accusations using my full real name on a talk page and refuses to remove it. Ironically, he thanked me for being polite and honest. I do not wish to engage in a flame war with him/her. I just want this unpleasant matter to go away quickly. Perhaps in my haste I am going through the wrong channels. Sorry about that. Can you help ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.145.220.20 (talk) 23:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * If you're looking to contact OTRS, I suggest you do so via Contact us; beyond that, sounds like some internal affairs. I'll see if I can get an OTRS volunteer to peek at this thread. Other than that, you could send another email. – Luna Santin  (talk) 02:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm one of the OTRS volunteers; if you'd like to email me about the problem and let me know what email address you used, I can look up the ticket for you and see if there is something we can do to assist you. Depending on the type and complexity of the issue, it may take several days to more than a week for a volunteer to respond to your email.  You will often find that on-wiki problems are solved much more quickly using the on-wiki processes, for instance, in your case, you may wish to review the procedures at dispute resolution.  If another editor is violating policies by attacking you or outing your real identity, you may wish to use Wikiquette alerts or in extreme cases, notify an administrator.  You're also welcome to contact me at my talk page if I can be of assistance, but please be aware that talk pages aren't a good place to leave confidential information, such as your email address. Shell babelfish 04:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The only time you even get an email response from OTRS, just to say we got your email, is when we reply to it. I am also on the OTRS team with Shell, so I can see what is going on. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:34, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Remember it is the holiday season, the OTRS workers are volunteers and may not be spending as much time as usual about now. Mr.  Z- man  06:01, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Images of oneself and rights
I want to upload an image of myself for my user page, an image which I own. Can I do so retaining enough rights that I can specify that it is only allowed to be posted on my user page? If so, what kind of attribution can I use? Is there a way for me to retain all rights and restrict it to just my user page? Charles 03:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I think if it's to be used outside of article space, an image must be under a free license. I don't believe you'd be able to limit its use to only your user page. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 03:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You could upload it that the author of picture (ie yourself) would have to be attributed to the picture. lemme just look it up.-- Kerotan Leave Me a Message  Have  a nice day :) 03:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I am eager to see what the options are. Charles 03:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Here is the one I was referring to. would that do?-- Kerotan Leave Me a Message  Have  a nice day :) 03:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks good, but not the best, but still good. Is that as far as I can restrict the use of my image on Wikipedia? Charles 03:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * No. Free content can be reused by anyone for anything. --teb728 t c 07:38, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The Creative Commons Attribution license is the "most restrictive" that can be placed on personal user pages. Anything higher like copyrighted pictures require fair use in order to be on Wikipedia articles. Unfortunately, personal user pages cannot have fair use pictures, only "free" pictures. -- Hdt 83     Chat 08:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Polarity therapy page missing [edit]
The first sentence has been altered incorrectly however there is no [edit] choice for just that line. The first appearance of [edit] seems to apply only to subsequent material.

Johnchitty (talk) 04:09, 28 December 2007 (UTC)Johnchitty
 * Simple enough, just click the "edit this page" tab at the top. Good luck! Soxred93 has a boring sig 04:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Markup error
Does anyone have a clue why the following markup does not render correctly? It's the lead from a stub I was about to write.
 * Antoine Dadine D'Autreserre (1602–1682) was a French jurist. He was also referred to as Dadinus, Dadino', Hauteserre or Alteserra.

Thanks! Sandstein (talk) 07:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not sure, but I did find a solution, albeit a rather messy one.

Antoine Dadine D'Autreserre (1602–1682) was a French jurist. He was also referred to as Dadinus, Dadino', Hauteserre or Alteserra.

-- Kerotan Leave Me a Message  Have  a nice day :) 07:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but sorry for the trouble. I've found the problem: a superfluous apostroph mark after "Dadino". Best, Sandstein (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

To update Special:Ancientpages
How does one update Special:Ancientpages? Can somebody go ahead and do that? Please, Let Us Update Special:Ancientpages. Thank you. —Preceding comment was added at 08:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I see you've already posted at the appropriate talk page. Perhaps you could put a editprotected tag there and ask for an update; otherwise, it's probably worth proposing for deletion, if they're not going to bother to update more than once a year. The Evil Spartan (talk) 09:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * You can't delete special pages. --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs (st47) 00:50, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Looking for information on Italian Miliarty records.
My grandfather fought in world war 2, and i came on here seeking information. Just wondering does Wiki provide any info on Italian soldiers who fought during the second world war?

74.56.118.12 (talk) 08:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Italy is mentioned frequently throughout the World War II article, and there's a section on their involvement in the war at Kingdom of Italy (1861-1946).
 * Is that the information you were looking for?  Cat tleG  irl   talk 09:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * See also Military history of Italy during World War II. Few individual soldiers are mentioned in Wikipedia, often high-ranking officers. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Depicting Muhammed in pictures at Wikipedia article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophet_Mohammed

Dear Sirs,

I would like to thank you for your work at wikipedia. However, I have a problem with depicting The Prophet Muhammed in the wikipedia article in the link above.

Although the images are taken from 15th and 16th century drawings, and I know they are historical documents, it is still not allowed in the current Islamic faith to draw pictures of the Prophet. The reason for that is due to respect for Him and His companions. This is to distinguish Him. Add to that the recent dispute and problems caused by the caricatures two years ago.

I hope you take this into consideration. I suggest blurring the face in the images if you cannot remove them all together.

Thank you, Best regards,

Rajy K. Al-Rayyes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.35.72.140 (talk) 09:21, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello Mr. Al-Rayys, and thanks for your comments. However, Wikipedia has a policy: Wikipedia is not censored, which means that it adds text and photographs even if people sometimes find them offensive (whether that be swearing, blasphemy, or sexually explicit photos). In fact, if you review the talk page and its archives, you will see this issue has been talked about extensively, even ad nauseum. Please note I do not always agree with the policy, but it stands as is. You are welcome to make suggestions, however, at WT:NOT to a change in policy. The Evil Spartan (talk) 09:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation template thingy... (SOLVED)
Can someone please fix my disambiguation template here: Glow-in-the-dark - I looked on the WP, info disambiguation page but I was overwhelmed with information since I am late for a meeting. I sorta made something up, which obviously didn't work! Otherwise please leave the explanation here and I will fix it when I get home tonight. Thanks! Sauda d e 7  12:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * See WP:D for disambiguation information. Happy New Year!  The Helpful One (Talk)(Contributions) 12:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks The Helpful One, but alas, that was the page that I said I didn't have time to read through because I was late to meet someone! No worries, someone has answered the question below! Happy New Year! Sauda d e 7   19:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You could use  Glow-in-the-dark , but that template seems to preclude any explanation of the articles linked. Alternatively, you could just do it manually: leave the article as you have it now, remove the dis template and add a generic  template, which produces the "This is a disambiguation page" bit at the bottom of the page. There may be a way to add article explanations in a template, but I haven't found it yet! -- Kateshort  forbob  14:56, 28 December 2007 (UTC)There is a list of templates

Thanks Kateshort  forbob, I will fix it now. Happy New Year and Thanks! Sauda d e 7  19:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Categories
Is there a "family tree" of categories headed by Category:Christian people? - CarbonLifeForm (talk) 12:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Entering Christian people at Special:CategoryTree gives . You can also get to CategoryTree through "Special pages" in the toolbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

This produces a duplication in e.g. "Category:Old Catholicism" as follows. How do I properly resolve it? I am tempted to cfd as Over-categorisation.
 * Catholics not in communion with Rome
 * [–] Independent Catholic Churches
 * [+] Old Catholicism
 * [–] Old Catholicism
 * [+] Bishops of Old Catholicism
 * [+] Mariavite Church

- CarbonLifeForm (talk) 17:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

About ISP Market in Bangla Desh
Need to know all about ISP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.11.122 (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Happy New Year!  The Helpful One (Talk)(Contributions) 13:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

getting wikipedia CD
dear sir/madam

i want to buy a wikipedia CD can you please tell me where can i find Wikipedia CD's near Delhi,India region?

thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.49.198 (talk) 14:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * If you can accesss bit torrent you can download a copy - see Wikipedia-CD/Download. Regards, Ben Aveling 14:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Resolving persistent errors in category info-box
The category box at the foot of Daijō-kan identifies it as having inadequate reference sources. Whatever else may be construed as a flaw, it is obviously not lacking in-line citations nor bibliographic source notes. I can't figure out how to delete this mistake? Rather than contacting you for help, what could I have done differently to resolve this anomaly? Is there a systematic way for me to figure out how this happened or how to avoid this kind of problem in other articles? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 15:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * EXAMPLE -->> Categories: All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since December 2007 | Government of feudal Japan | Meiji Restoration | Government of Japan | Government ministers of Japan
 * Find Junior Taxation Undersecretary or (more generally) "citation". - CarbonLifeForm (talk) 15:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's caused by Failed verification, added in . Categories are often added by templates. If you click "edit this page" then the bottom of the window shows the transcluded templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:35, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Images
How Do I Link To An Article Via An Image (Ie: You Click The Image And The Browser Takes You To A Page Instead Of The Images Description Page?) Thanx! xxx Hyper Girl (talk) 15:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * You have to do it in a rather indirect way: imagemaps. See mw:Extension:ImageMap for examples.  Instead of having multiple hot-spots, you will want the whole image to be one big hotspot. -- <font color='#ff0000'>k <font color='#cc0033'>a <font color='#990066'>i <font color='#660099'>n <font color='#3300cc'>a <font color='#0000ff'>w &trade; 15:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I've got the following code: Which produces: But I can't click the image. It should link to the main page but it doesn't. I'm really not sure what to do here. Any help? Thanx! xxx Hyper Girl (talk) 16:41, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * See the code - I changed the rect to default. It works now and is easier than defining a rect. -- <font color='#ff0000'>k <font color='#cc0033'>a <font color='#990066'>i <font color='#660099'>n <font color='#3300cc'>a <font color='#0000ff'>w &trade; 17:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much Kainaw! xxx User:Hyper Girl 17:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

search
where would I go or what would I use to find a specific person? 71.7.201.72 (talk) 16:23, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Click here and then type what you want to search for in the box and click "search". Good luck! xxx Hyper Girl (talk) 16:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Can I use a widget on Wikipedia to import a photo gallery?
Is there a way and is it acceptable practice to use a widget on Wikipedia in order to import a photo gallery? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.77.16.6 (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Most images uploaded to Wikipedia are deleted because they are not properly licensed for use on Wikipedia. As such, you need to upload your images one at a time and indicate the licensing for each image. -- <font color='#ff0000'>k <font color='#cc0033'>a <font color='#990066'>i <font color='#660099'>n <font color='#3300cc'>a <font color='#0000ff'>w &trade; 17:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Article written as an advertisment
I see this message on the RAQ wiki page and wonder what I can do to make it not read like an ad. I have zero affiliation with the band and live on the other side of the country from them. I have no agenda other then adding an info page on RAQ to explain what and who RAQ is. I thought I was doing this by not adding tour dates and such. Just a bio and a list of albums and songs, thats it. What can I do different? I admit I am a total kneub here.

Smiles, Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marklar1025 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * What you can do to improve the page, in this case, is basically cutting out stuff that sounds like an ad campaign or advertising and replace it with more encyclopedic language. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and is written from a neutral point of view. The article you mentioned, RAQ, looks like a positive review or poster for the article, which is definitely not what Wikipedia is supposed to be. Just try to cut out some of that stuff, find independent, reliable sources for it so that it's not just using the band's own website, and it'll improve the article a lot. Be bold in editing; if you mess something up, it's really no big deal and it can be quite easily fixed. And considering the current state of the article, I somehow doubt you'll make it worse. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 19:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

2 Questions regarding posting
My Grandfather's page has erroneously listed his name as “Gus” Kenneally when his name was George & his nickname was “Gigi.” How do I change it ?

Also I posted a picture of him on the site & it was taken down for Verification? Not sure how to put a picture on it…..

I am a long time site user …just not versed in how to add or change stuff….

Can someone help? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gus_Kenneally —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.63.96.108 (talk) 20:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * To change the title of a page, you need to move the page to the new title. To do this, you need to create an account, four days after which you'll be able to move pages. (Newly registered users can't move pages.) I'll move the page myself for this article. For images, they need to be released under a free license or fair use, so it might have been deleted if no license was specified. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 20:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

create page for a candidate
Hi:

We are trying to create a page for a candidate. How do we do this properly? We just received a message, (don't know how to reply to it) stating we were making unconstructive changes or what appeared to be vandalism. Of course, that is not our intent. Therefore, what is the proper way to create a page for a candidate?

Because we may not be able to find your response on this page, as we are unsure of how to properly use Wikipedia, please send a reply to <e-mail removed>.

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freda Stevens (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:SPA, WP:COI, Role account, WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:BIO. --Teratornis (talk) 23:15, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Your edit here may have resembled "vandalism" because you posted some information on a user page that belonged on that user's talk page. Please read Help:Talk page to learn how we communicate with other users on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * To summarize all those pages Teratornis linked to, it's probably not a good idea for you to create a page on that person because you appear to have a conflict of interest there, and would have difficulty writing it from a neutral point of view. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 02:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalizing my contributions
A user named Duplicity notified me that they removed links to my blog which I'd added to several Wikipedia articles:

Duplicity did not tell me which articles he/she removed links from & I'd like to find out how I can track this down. Second, I replied to Duplicity that I am not violating a conflict of interest rule because I am an established expert in the fields I write about--the Israeli Palestinian conflict. I have an MA in this field, publish widely in established media like The Guardian, Los Angeles Times & have been interviewed for my expertise by the NY Times, Seattle Post Intelligencer, Jewish Forward and other publications.

I also have a chapter that will be published in a book of essay by Verso Books on the Israeli Palestinian conflict this September.

The information in my blog is always sourced to reputable Israeli and U.S. media and my posts are highly researched. I only link posts to Wikipedia articles that are directly relevant & where I think a Wikipedia reader would gain added knowledge of the subject.

Is there any way I can prevent people like Duplicity from vandalizing my contributions? Richard (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Your contributions were not "vandalized" by Duplicity; they were reverted because the external links you added weren't appropriate for the article. Regardless of whether you are considered an expert in a subject, you still have a conflict of interest in adding a link to your own blog. Also, blogs are generally not considered reliable sources, partly because they inherently have the point of view of whoever writes them. What you can do is discuss your sources and links on the article's talk page and explain why they should be included in the article; this avoids issues with having a conflict of interest. And, being an expert on the subject, your help with improve the articles will be welcome. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

First, the posts linked to were entirely appropriate to the article. Second, in the entire COI article you linked there isn't a single reference that I saw saying that linking to one's own blog is a conflict of interest. Besides, a conflict of interest always involves a person who receives a benefit from their behavior & I have received no benefit whatsoever fr. the link. On the contrary, the link is meant to enrich the reader's experience by allowing them to read an external source that would provide more detail than is possible in a Wikipedia article.

Regarding blogs, your view of blogs is a bit one sided. Blogs have a pt of view. But so does journalism & so do books & so do research papers all of which are supposedly of higher reliability as Wikipedia sources. Not all blogs are the same. Some blogs are entirely reputable sources in their subject area. Some are propaganda & worthless for Wikipedia's purposes. There is no one size fits all regarding blogs.Richard (talk) 07:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Conflict of interest uses another definition than you and since this is about Wikipedia, it's our definition that applies. There is no point arguing with it. If we changed the definition of the term itself then we would also change the guideline so it still covered people linking their own site for whatever purpose. The most relevant page in this case is probably External links which says: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked. If the link is to a relevant and informative site that should otherwise be included, please consider mentioning it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it." PrimeHunter (talk) 15:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Category mishap
Hmm. . . well I must have forgotten a step somewhere. I just added a Category:WikiProject contemporary music articles (click the red link, it works) link to the new. It seems to display some of the talk pages, but doesn’t believe the category has been created yet. :) Should I have avoided trying to create the category and add it in the same step? Thanks, --S.dedalus (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * The page itself hasn't been made - just go to Category:WikiProject contemporary music articles, click edit and type a brief description. The box for editing gets placed near the bottom of the page. --h2g2bob (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, DUH. [[Image:Face-blush.svg|25px]] Now I feel silly. Thanks for your help; I didn’t realize a potential category could be filled with articles like that before it even existed! --S.dedalus (talk) 00:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)