Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2010 December 30

= December 30 =

Fundraiser
Hello,

This is statement rather than a question. I have donated to the fundraiser, my only conflict with the matter is that Jimmy Wales's picture is constantly posted for it, which may give a certain impression of egocentricity. To make the campaign more appealing the voices and pictures of the users should reflect the service wikipedia provides to the world, not its founder's.

Kind regards

N.D. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.98.127 (talk) 02:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * There have been, in the past weeks, random other Wikipedia users whose face appeared instead of The Great Leader's. Not sure where they went.  -- Jayron  32  02:54, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Alexandra Powers
Would you mind cleaning up the Alexandra Powers article. I added a reference and messed up. Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 05:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The article has been cleaned up again. A number of edit summaries and talk page comments have advised you to find a more reliable source for this addition. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

copyright fees
I want to use some photos on my website buit the copyright info is monumental. What is a simple way to pay a fee to cover this, if that is what I need to do? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Staycentral (talk • contribs) 06:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * By the very nature of the material hosted here, you do not have to pay a fee to use any photos found on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, however, depending on the license, you may not be allowed to use them without the consent of the owner of the original material. What are the files you want to use?  [CharlieEchoTango]  09:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Creating an article
Dear Sir or Madam,

i am in charge of the marketing activities of a long-established german company called Schmidbauer GmbH & Co. KG. As i am trying to inform people and potential clients the best possible way, i wrote an article about the company on Wikipedia.

Unfortunately, it was deleted on the grounds that it would be commercial. To be fair, however, i did not use any terms of self-glorification but rather descriptive information about history etc.

I would like to give the whole story a new try by the beginning of next year.

Hope you can tell me in the meantime which details i should take into consideration.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

Andreas Radler Marketing Director — Preceding unsigned comment added by SchmidbauerGroup (talk • contribs) 09:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The short answer is that you should not be creating this article, because you have a conflict of interest. Wikipedia is not a medium for advertising or promotion. Please read the FAQ for organisations.
 * More bad news: your chosen user name conflicts with the user name policy and is likely to be blocked soon. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

SUL Usurpation
The English Wikipedia has changed so that uploading new images should preferably be done to WikiMedia Commons. I don't have an account there, so I tried to generate one with then new Single User Login. That wasn't entirely successful, because some other people have already registered an account named "JIP" at the Danish and Russian Wikipedias, in 2009. The Danish one has no edits, the Russian one has one. I placed a Usurpation Request template on the talk page of both accounts. I can understand some Danish because it's similar to Swedish, but I don't understand any Russian. Is this enough? How will I know if I can usurp the accounts? J I P &#124; Talk 09:58, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * You can post the request in English here: . The Russian WP's requirements for usurping accounts there can be found here, which I think are easily met. Arakunem Talk 14:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I also left a notice on the user name change page on both the Danish and the Russian Wikipedias. In English on the Russian one, in Swedish on the Danish one. Let's see what they reply. J I P  &#124; Talk 21:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Remove my photos from Wikipedia
I want all my photos removed from wikipedia.

For example: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ficheiro:Portimao223.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Quinta22.jpg

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.203.186 (talk) 14:11, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Even if you are the creator of these images (something of which we have no evidence one way or the other), you have their creator has already licensed their use, and I believe that license is irrevocable. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * As OrangeMike says, the licensing cannot be 'undone'. The only possible exception to this would be if it could be proved that the uploader is not the copyright owner, and proved that there is a copyright violation, which I could not find evidence of. Incidentally, although the same applies for the Portuguese Wikipedia, even if the situation was different, there is nothing which we could do - all the Wikipedias are independent, and we have no say over what they do --  Phantom Steve .alt/ talk \[alternative account of Phantomsteve] 17:59, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * And in fact File:Quinta22.jpg is on Commons, which has its own licensing requirements, policies and guidelines. – ukexpat (talk) 18:04, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I, the copyright holder of this work, want this File DELETED as soon as possible. Several years free... but now is "All Rights reserved" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.154.203.186 (talk) 13:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * When you uploaded it, you gave an irrevocable license. You cannot now change your mind. The Commons deletion discussion is here. JohnCD (talk) 22:30, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Why doesn't My watchlist e-mail me new changes?
Is there a setting that I can select in order to be notified of new changes to articles or stuff I'm watching? This is very important, if it doesn't exist I'm wondering why no one added it by now... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sergiu-Daniel (talk • contribs) 17:09, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * E-mail: not that I know of, but you can set up a RSS feed for your watchlist. Jarkeld (talk) 17:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Why has nobody added it by now? Probably because a feature like that would overload the servers like mad! Diego Grez (EMSIUB) (talk) 17:45, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * As mentioned above, you can subscribe to an RSS feed but not email notification. I believe that smaller Wikipedias allow the email option, but the English language Wikipedia is so large with so many registered users, it would slow the site too much if a significant number of people were getting emails! --  Phantom Steve .alt/ talk \[alternative account of Phantomsteve] 17:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

One discussion in multiple forums
I've started a discussion on Talk:Tom Hanks about awards. I think the discussion would be of interest to a broader audience, and I'd like to solicit opinions of other editors. Therefore, I'd like to have the same discussion appear on the Hanks Talk page, on BLPN, and on the actors and filmmakers project Talk page. I envision somehow transincluding the discussion so it appears simultaneously on all three and that any edits in any of those forums also appear on all three.

First, is this an appropriate thing to do? Second, if so, how do I do it?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The best thing to do is to have the discussion on the article talk page, and to leave pointers at the appropriate discussion boards, like "Hey, I'm having a discussion about blah blah blah at Talk:Tom Hanks, interested editors should comment there." That keeps the discussion in one location.  You'd want to leave a few messages at general noticeboards, and avoid inviting specific users who would be likely to only agree with your side, per WP:CANVASS, but leaving a notice at the places you note above seems fine by me  -- Jayron  32  20:10, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm pretty sure I remember seeing the kind of transinclusion I mentioned above in other contexts. Assuming my memory is correct, when is transinclusion appropriate and when is the method you suggested appropriate? My objective is to extend any consensus on the issues beyond just Hanks, which is why I wanted to involve other editors who frequent the more global forums and making the discussions (and any conclusions reached) more visible in the broader forums.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * See WP:MULTI. If you transclude the discussion to other pages, people will reply on those pages. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 16:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * First, if I transclude the discussion, no matter where an editor replies, won't that reply appear in all places? Second, WP:MULTI talks moving everything to one location and "linking" to it; I don't think it's referring to transclusion but to an after-the-fact move because of a fragmented discussion in multiple places (not my case). Third, I still don't know mechanically how to transclude the discussion. (If I transclude, I would also explain that the discussion is transcluded and where so everyone knows what's going on.) And, finally, although Jayron says it's "best" to put in pointers (meaning not transclusion), he doesn't say why.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Invisible anchors?
While I've seen the following before, I'm not sure what they are called. I want to have an anchor in an article so that can be linked with foobar where baz is *not* the name of a section, but rather something that is invisible if you are looking at article foobar without editing.Naraht (talk) 20:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * anchor Algebraist 20:09, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanx! Naraht (talk) 20:58, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Hilite template not working
For some reason, outside of the template documentation, I cannot get the hilite template to work. Any thoughts on why? –  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  21:13, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The template Hilite has a third parameter for expiration (the date after which the text will no longer be highlighted. If you were referring to your edit to Talk:What the Hell (song), you supplied '21-12-2010' for this parameter, which the template interpreted as '21 December 2010'. Your edit was made on 30 December; hence, the template thought the highlight was already expired. Intelligent  sium  21:21, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That made me laugh, what a silly error on my part. Only a few moments ago, I realized I hadn't provided an example of the use, and had I done that, then I probably could have realized my mistake. You are very kind for digging into the problem. Thanks so much Intelligentsium, and sorry for wasting your time lol. –  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  01:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

How do I edit an photo on Wiki?
Good Afternoon. I've been trying for a while but I can't figure out how to edit a photo on the site... I'd like to replace John Hawkes' (John Hawkes (actor)) with another image but i"m having a difficult time...

Can you help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samfilippo (talk • contribs) 21:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If you simply want to replace the image with another one, you can upload the new one and edit the article to display the new image instead of the old one. That's what I did with Simon Furman - the old image was unbelievably crappy, but I couldn't upload a better photo I didn't own the copyright to. So when I met him, I took a photo of him, asked for his permission, and having got it, I uploaded the new photo. You can do the same with John Hawkes, if the license permits. If you actually want to edit the existing photo, I believe what you have to do is download the existing photo, edit it off-line, and upload it back with the same name. J I P  &#124; Talk 21:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Picture tutorial may help also. -- &oelig; &trade; 10:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Edwardian Funerals
Did women attend funerals in Edwardian times? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottishjeannie (talk • contribs) 21:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Symbol_move_vote.svg Have you tried the section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia.  For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: [ click here] . I hope this helps..  Intelligent  sium  21:45, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Wife complaint
Hello,

We received a complaint, on the French Wikipedia, from the ex-wife of someone who have an article on the English Wikipedia. Has I have absolutly no idea about your policy and how to manage this request on your Wikipedia, I just transmit it (so please don't explain me what to do, just do it ;-)).

The request is here, in French. If you don't read French, I give you a summary :

The second wife of Willie Brigitte protest that her identity and the existence of her children with Willie Brigitte are personnal data that can't be divulgated without her autorisation. For this reason she request the deletion of these informations in the article.

Thanks for your attention, and sorry for the level of my english

--Hercule (talk) 23:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not absolutely 100% positive, but I'm fairly certain that we don't remove information for such reasons, however I'll defer to others for more input. --Ks1stm (talk) [alternative account of Ks0stm] 23:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No way. Wikipedia's inherent purpose is to publish information that is already available elsewhere, and in any case it is difficult to prove this information (that is on public record) is defamatory or libelous in some way. Xenon54 (talk) 00:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think the claim is that it's defamatory or libellous, it's that they don't want to be mentioned on wikipedia; but we don't act on such concerns. If they're notable enough to warrant an article, or relevant enough to another article to warrant mention, they'll be mentioned.  Giftiger Wunsch   [TALK]  01:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If the person so aggreived wishes to persue it, they should contact The Foundation via email. I suspect that The Foundation will say what we have here, but at least it would be an authoritative response rather than the response of a bunch of volunteers.  -- Jayron  32  01:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree - that particular bit of information appears to be referenced at ABC in Australia, a reliable source, and so the information is public. The bit about children and divorce isn't sourced, so that could be removed, but not the fact that they were married. With that in mind, I'd be very surprised if a request to the Foundation would receive the desired result for the ex-wife  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 06:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It wouldn't, but that's not the point. The point is, if you and I and a bunch of other volunteers say "We're not going to remove it for your reasoning" that's not very convincing.  WHen the trutees of Wikipedia itself say the same thing, it carries more weight.  That's why I always refer these sort of things to the Foundation; since I pretty much know what They would say about an issue like this, it sounds much better coming from Them than coming from me.  -- Jayron  32  06:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * May be of relevances here - Biographies of living persons and  Relationships do not confer notability and Biographies of living persons.Moxy (talk) 06:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The French version of the article in question does not mention the names of Willie Brigitte's wives or children, and hasn't for at least a year. On the other hand, the English version of the article is significantly more detailed (though largely unreferenced) and mentions the names of three different wives, only the last of whom has any relevance to the the reasons for Willie Brigitte's notability.  Although the family details are available on the internet (notably in ABC's transcript of the "Interrogations of Willie Brigitte", which is used as a reference in the article), the background section is unreferenced and could easily be reworded to remove the first wife's name.  The mention of the second wife's name is referenced (by the ABC transcript) but is in my opinion irrelevant to the article; we could easily say something like "he married for a second time in 1999".  The "in Australia" section is also unreferenced, but claims the third marriage was a "marriage of convenience" to a Australian convert to Islam, and is highly relevant to the article.  The relevant policy is this case is WP:BLPNAME, which states: "The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons."  For that reason, I have adjusted the article wording.  Astronaut (talk) 10:27, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot everybody. --Hercule (talk) 14:20, 6 January 2011 (UTC)