Help desk
< August 1	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 3 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

August 2

Free logos

Under what conditions can a logo be released free? The Google logo is free, but is under the incenses Trademark and PD-textlogo. Could this logo (after undergoing a creation, similar to the Google logo's) be released under the same license? • S • C • A • R • C • E • 02:09, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. Google's logo is simply differently-coloured letters. I could create the same thing in two minutes, and so the logo isn't creative enough to be copyrighted. But the logo of Nightmare on Elm Street is a completely different story - it's almost certainly copyrighted. Xenon54 (talk) 02:51, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

noting content added to the wrong section of an article

You know how you can add {{Citation needed|date=August 2009}} into the content of an article and it will create a small notation within the article drawing attention to the issue? Well I wanted to know if there is a page somewhere that lists a whole bunch of the available "in-line notation tags" (p.s. what is this type of thing called?)

A list of many available tags would be great but the real reason I'm asking is because I wanted to know if there is an "in-line notation tag" for the issue of statements in a section of an article being misplaced or not belonging in that section. For example, there's a city article with a subsection called "transportation" and there's some good facts about the city's location influencing trade, but that fact belongs someplace else and not in the section designated for transportation. So is there a tag that says "hey this fact belongs someplace else in this article but not in this section"?

Thanks --Fife Club (talk) 03:40, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than tag the text why don't you just be bold and move it to the more appropriate place? – ukexpat (talk) 03:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You probably want {{trivia}} • S • C • A • R • C • E • 08:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure {{trivia}} quite covers it - I can see people removing it saying "this isn't a list of indiscriminate info" and missing the point about the appropriate section. I'm with Ukexpat: while tagging may sometimes be helpful for small 'concentrated' things like ^{[citation needed]}, your concern is probably better dealt with by direct action or a talk-page thread. Olaf Davis (talk) 12:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Depending on the traffic of the article, a message may not be read for years (literally, especially template talk pages). In which case, I look for the top, most current editor and send a message via {{new talk}} • S • C • A • R • C • E • 13:53, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete article

Out of curiosity, what should be done with this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Neebish_Resort Keepscases (talk) 06:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's currently marked as a stub meaning it's not considered a full article. "An article too short to provide more than rudimentary information about a subject should be marked as a stub by adding a stub template from the list here to the end of the article. Anyone can edit a stub article, or remove a stub template from an article which is no longer a stub" • S • C • A • R • C • E • 08:39, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean with regards to deletion, or finding sources, or what, Keepscases? Olaf Davis (talk) 13:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Before another user updated it earlier today, it had a lot of blanks in it and just didn't seem like it should have been published. Keepscases (talk) 18:54, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the blanks. Also, as I could find no reliable sources of information, I put up the Proposal for Deletion too. I meant to say so here earlier... but apparently the decorating is more important than editing Wikipedia! -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 18:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't your housemates know there is no deadline? Olaf Davis (talk) 20:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Commons on Flickr

Is it kind of an unspoken rule that if an image licensed under a Creative Commons license uploaded to Flickr and appears to be a professional photo or other copyvio not be uploaded to the Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons? I've seen film posters, promo pics, all under the CC license. If uploaded, how would such a matter be handled? • S • C • A • R • C • E • 08:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Flickr washing? Such images are copyvio, and should be listed for deletion. /--59.95.100.85 (talk) 08:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, you're a pretty helpful IP, have you considered logging in/creating an account? • S • C • A • R • C • E • 11:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by the contribs, I'm sure it's just a regular user who forgot to login. hmwith τ 13:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure. There have been several helpful 59.95.* at the help desk recently. Getting an account is of course optional but it has benefits. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are Userpage Guestbooks allowed?

That is, can subpages of userpages be created where people who visited the userpage sign a guestbook?--<color=orange> Occono </color> (talk) 09:00, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many people have those in their userspace, even though WP:NOTMYSPACE. --59.95.100.85 (talk) 09:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, so are you saying people do it but I shouldn't? I wouldn't use it for starting conversations/social networking.--<color=orange> Occono </color> (talk) 09:18, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not saying that, neither am I opposed to these things (don't really care tbh). You can create one too, guestbooks don't do any harm. :) By "..even though WP:NOTMYSPACE" I just meant to point out that guestbooks have little or no use in building an encyclopedia and having one may be viewed as being bit myspacey by some.

Is your signature supposed to be orange? -59.95.109.162 (talk) 10:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've given him the correct coding for that... -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 10:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User pages are given a lot of latitude, but should focus on the Wikipedia project. When you create a userpage, the questions to ask are "how does this help Wikipedia?" and "how does this make me a better editor?" ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 10:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IE8#Missing_features

In regards to the above Wikipedia article/topic, I see this claim is unsourced. It is however probably true but could also constitute vandalism. I am very, very new to Wikipedia should I delete this as it does not stand up to any of your policys that I have read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zthatin (talk • contribs) 11:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to the above by whos recommendation is this feature required?--Zthatin (talk) 11:08, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly speaking, un-cited claims can be removed (though it's a good idea to mention why you're removing it in your WP:Edit summary). A better approach, and what I've done, is to add a {{fact}} tag after the unsupported claim - this alerts other editors, and enables them to look for references supporting the claim. If a tag remains for a while, and no evidence is provided to support it, then an editor may remove the claim without concern.

My reading of the article is that SVG is recommended by W3C, the "World Wide Web Consortium".

Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 11:12, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking maybe the {{Unreferenced}} tag would be more suitable, which is found here, Thanks for helping me again.--Zthatin (talk) 11:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{Unreferenced|section}} would have been fine, though I'd tend to use it for sections with numerous uncited claims, in order to avoid adding lots of {{fact}} tags.

I've added a reference for IE8 not supporting SVG, and removed the parts of the sentence about "all major browsers supporting SVG" and "SVG is a W3C recommendation" - the former needs to be cited, and raises "what is a major browser?" issues, and reading the W3C site it's unclear to me whether SVG is recommended for web user agents ("browsers") - W3C publish "recommendations" a lot, similar to RFCs elsewehere.

Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 11:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for adding the reference, I might add to this sentence. That news article you have provided is very good. I am indeed getting sucked in to Wikipedia like you said lol. All the best:).--Zthatin (talk) 11:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't acknowledge your thanks - no problem!

Incidentally, as a final part of this I posted on the article's talk page, to let its regular editors know what I've done and why. I removed some text, that may feel needs to be re-added - hopefully my comments will help them re-add it with supporting references. Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 11:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing a picture

I just added a picture to the article on Bellevue University, but the picture is not one of the best ones I could have put on Wikipedia. Specifically, there are lines in the picture which obviously should not be there. Is there a way to fix that, other than getting a new picture? (I realize this may be something I have to ask on Wikimedia Commons.) DandyDan2007 (talk) 11:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected it. You can take your image through any image manipulation software. For instance, for this task, I used Paint since it wasn't something that required much editing, but for more challenging jobs I use GIMP • S • C • A • R • C • E • 12:08, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you use an Apple, download GIMP as Scarce uses. If you use a PC, you can download PAINT.net. You can't go wrong with either; they're both powerful and free.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:32, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I use Windows XP and it came with Paint already installed (and the website above is not Windows Paint, see Paint) and therefore you don't need an Apple for GIMP • S • C • A • R • C • E • 08:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GIMP will work on Windows (and even Linux/BSD), but if you don't want to download and install stuff then there are free online editing tools—Picnik is one that I know. --59.95.122.36 (talk) 09:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PAINT.net is about 4 trillion times as powerful as paint, Scarce, though I see that they do have Gimp for Windows:-) I was not implying that PAINT.net was the same as Paint, and would never recommend that weakling little program to anyone. I have Gimp on my Apple at work, and PAINT.net on my PC at hom, and I find PAINT.net more user friendly.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hiding the Contents box

Is it possible to hide the Contents box in an article? Or at least collapse it by default?poisonborz 17:23, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is. See WP:TOC - you can do it on a user-level (you never see TOCs) and on an article-level (no one sees the TOC for that article). Cheers, TFOWR^{This flag once was red} 17:27, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You want a magic word just copy an paste this code any where on the page to hide it __NOTOC__ • S • C • A • R • C • E • 08:53, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

computer speed

Does wikipedia offer suggestions for removing programs that slow computer response time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.8.236.2 (talk) 18:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Computing reference desk. They specialize in answering computer questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps.-- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 18:25, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

publish my article

Ok friends I have it written , is there a button or page that I use to publish and make the article Live? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bella1968 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see the article on your talk page. Please copy the contents, and then type your article's title into the search box and press "go." The article's title should appear as a red link. Click the red link and paste the contents of your article and then press "save." --William S. Saturn (talk) 19:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not bad, and I understand the urge to publish as soon as you can, but your citations need some work - try reading wp:cite.--SPhilbrick T 21:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BLP images

If the subject of a BLP article wants a picture of them removed from their article, are we required to comply? If so, is there a link on the wiki that talks about this? Supposedly the subject of the article initially gave verbal permission for the picture to be on the article, then changed their mind.--Rockfang (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it someone marginally notable? They can request deletion of their articles (see here - pretty sure it appears elsewhere too but I can never find it) but I've never heard any precedent either way on removing photos. If they're more than marginally notable then the answer would be no, I'm sure. Olaf Davis (talk) 20:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The person is indeed notable. They've won numerous literary awards. Thank you for your input.--Rockfang (talk) 20:10, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is the license on the photo? If it is based only on verbal permission of the subject to be used on the article, perhaps it should be deleted for lacking a free license (even if the subject were still content to have it there. In the first place the license must come from the copyright owner (likely not the subject). And it must allow reuse anywhere by anyone for anything: Wikipedia does not accept permission for use only on Wikipedia. —teb728 t c 22:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Oh, and if the subject doesn't mind having a photo in the article but just doesn't like the photo that is there, they could probably arrange to replace it with a free photo that they like. —teb728 t c 22:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the image..Kate_Grenville it has been readded by rockfang, correctly I think. The uploader added the ccby3 and then the subject didn't like it and asked for removal, a bit sad but it is free in the wind now..no going back, so to speak. The idea from Teb is good and perhaps should be added to the talk page to help the subject. (Off2riorob (talk) 22:53, 2 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

This claim is on the tallk page from the uploader..."that she expressly asked that her photograph (which I had taken of her, with her permission) be removed from her entry, and not be replaced" (Off2riorob (talk) 22:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Once it's been released into the public domain, I don't think there's any way to take that back! --Orange Mike | Talk 14:09, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for the comments. To Orange Mike, the file isn't in the public domain, but I do understand what you meant.--Rockfang (talk) 22:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps review userbox

Is there a userbox for reviews done as part of GA sweeps? I would like to put one under my userbox for GACs reviewed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please rephrase you question? Are you talking about "This user helped promote the article "So and so" to good article status."? Or, if you'd like to create one see WP:UBX • S • C • A • R • C • E • 06:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am talking about an analogue to {{User Good Articles reviewed}} that would be for GA Sweeps and total articles swept.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can just copy the one you linked to, and create a new template with it; you just need to change the text, but be sure to keep the code in the text. Gary King (talk) 02:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just created {{User GA sweeps}} (as a shameless copy of {{User Good Articles reviewed}}), which can be called in the same wasy as User Good Articles reviewed (for example, {{User GA sweeps|5}}). Feel free to tweak the coloring, icon, etc. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:10, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Cirt (talk) 05:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]