Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2015 February 16

= February 16 =

Blurred out laptop and computer screens
Hi, why are photos of Microsoft Windows on laptops and desktop pcs being blurred out in articles? Polloloco51 (talk) 04:48, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Because we do not have legal permission to use that copyrighted material. See Software screenshots and Non-free content for details. --Guy Macon (talk) 06:59, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I am confused, I have never heard of this before and find it very strange. Polloloco51 (talk) 17:01, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Since when did any website need legal permission to show a photo of a laptop or desktop running Microsoft Windows?Polloloco51 (talk) 17:10, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Since when? Since January 1, 1978. If you want to see Microsoft's list of allowable uses (which are incompatible with Wikipedia's terms of use), please look here.


 * "Wikipedia's goal is to be a free content encyclopedia, with free content defined as content that does not bear copyright restrictions on the right to redistribute, study, modify and improve, or otherwise use works for any purpose in any medium, even commercially. Any content not satisfying these criteria is said to be non-free. This includes all content (including images) that is fully copyrighted, or which is made available subject to restrictions such as "non-commercial use only" or "for use on Wikipedia only". (Many images that are generally available free of charge may thus still be "non-free" for Wikipedia's purposes.) The Foundation uses the definition of "free" as described here."


 * "The licensing policy of the Wikimedia Foundation expects all content hosted on Wikimedia projects to be free content; however, there are exceptions. The policy allows projects (with the exception of Wikimedia Commons) to adopt an exemption doctrine policy allowing the use of non-free content. Their use should be minimal and confined (with limited exceptions) to illustrating historically significant events, to include identifying protected works such as logos, or to complement (within narrow limits) articles about copyrighted contemporary works. Non-free content should not be used when a freely licensed file that serves the same purpose can reasonably be expected to be uploaded, as is the case for almost all portraits of living people. Non-free content should be replaced by free content should such emerge."


 * "This document serves as the exemption doctrine policy of the English Wikipedia. Non-free content can be used on Wikipedia in certain cases (for example, in some situations where acquiring a freely licensed image for a particular subject is not possible), but only within the United States legal doctrine of fair use, and in accordance with Wikipedia's own non-free content criteria as set out below. The use of non-free content on Wikipedia is therefore subject to purposely stricter standards than those laid down in U.S. copyright law."


 * Source:  Non-free content.  --Guy Macon (talk) 20:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I highly doubt Microsoft cares if people post photos of their pcs with Windows visibly running, in fact I am sure they want that as it's free advertising for them. Additionally, I think it degrades the quality of articles on Wikipedia to see laptop or desktop pcs with giant pixels in front of them. I feel, policy or not, it is utter nonsense to have to blur out laptops or desktops that are running Windows, when Windows is the most widely used desktop operating system. Polloloco51 (talk) 02:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the info and the help although I disagree with this subject. Polloloco51 (talk) 03:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

isolation transformer
hi i surf the webpages but i didn't find any related pages about the operation of isolation transformers. so i would be glad if you could help me with this issue. thanks --46.209.243.34 (talk) 11:36, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Perhaps isolation transformer is a good place to start.  11:46, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Logo
How can I upload renewed logo to an article or that company? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SleepEditor (talk • contribs) 15:37, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * See WP:UPLOAD. Dismas |(talk) 18:33, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Images keep getting deleted
Hello,

I am writing an article for Jesse Cutler in Wikipedia. He has given me pics to use but they keep getting deleted. Some of these pics were taken by his father, who has since deceased, but are his and he has obvious rights. The article is about his life as an entertainer and goes back to the 60's. I keep getting copyright infringement errors and not sure how or what I need to supply to be able to use them.

Any advice, suggestions or directions would be greatly appreciated

Surfsupjoe125 (talk) 16:03, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The copyright owner needs to give Wikiamedia permission to use the pictures, please follow the instructions here: CONSENT. Cheers,  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 16:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Why?
Why do you good fellows always keep getting the same questions over and over again from different companies and people wanting articles about themselves, when (especially in regard to the former) Wikipedia's stance is already pretty well known? Tharthandorf Aquanashi (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Some people just don't have a clue how things work here and most others just don't search the archives. Fun to read though. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie &#124; Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775 21:39, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Because it is different companies and people wanting articles about themselves, and because apparently Wikipedia's policies and guidelines are not universally known outside the community of editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Especially WP:COI, WP:NOT, and WP:NLT (the funniest ones). You do occasionally have people who have carefully done their research before posting anything and you can recognise them by the fact that they cite such rules and are often quite polite and civil. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie &#124; Say Shalom! 27 Shevat 5775


 * Mostly because it's not true that Wikipedia's stance is pretty well known. Wikipedia is one of the best known sites on the Internet, and if you are wanting to promote a company, a band, an artist, a charity, a cause, or a New Theory of Everything, the Internet is a prime tool for doing so, so obviously Wikipedia is a superprime tool, because it is where everybody looks things up. Facebook, Twitter are good places to promote your thing, but often Wikipedia is the first entry in a Google search. --ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 16 February 2015 (UTC)