Help desk
< May 20	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 22 >

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.

May 21

Hello

I apologize in advance for my extreme lack of computer savvy and that is ultimately what I blame this on. There is an article with a factual error in it. It is the article here, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand) The error is in the section titled, "Intellectual Impact" which states near the end of its first paragraph that the book titled, "The Virtue of Selfishness" is a novel. This is not true. I tried to change it. I thought I succeeded when I checked back in a few hours and it was as I had made it. It appears either I fucked up or some retard changed it back. I say retard because it is a fucking simple ass fact to figure out that the goddamned book is not a fucking novel. What fucking idiot would change it back? Not you, I'm sure. I even put that as my reason for changing it. Factual error. So it must be my dumbass fault. Obviously I changed it wrong. So can you do me a favor and change it for me? The Virtue of Selfishness is a non-fiction work; a collection of essays. NOT a novel. I apologize again for my ignorance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kserrec (talk • contribs) 02:55, 21 May 2011

First, your obscenities and attacks are not necessary - see WP:CIVIL. Second, it was properly changed back because it's part of a quote. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 02:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To expand a little more about what NeilN said, the problem is that the Wikipedia article is directly quoting another source, and that source uses the word "novel". Secondly, if you wish to get other people to do what you want them to do, rule number one in persuading others to agree with you is to treat them with respect and dignity. Swearing at people and calling them names makes them wish to ignore what you have to say; and if you feel that what you have to say is important, you should (I would think) want people to listen to your arguements, and not your insults. Finally, if you wish to discuss changes to an article, the best place to do it is at the article's discussion page, in this case Talk:Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand). I assume you believe that you have something to say that you feel others should act upon, given that swearing at them and insulting them will make them wish to oppose you, you should perhaps change your tactics when you discuss the issue there. --Jayron32 03:04, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why pages deleted about Scientific Journal

Hi I see many pages on journals on wikipedia for ex: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journal_of_Organic_Chemistry

I want to add pages about:

Journal of Pharmacy and BioAllied Sciences (www.jpbsonline.org) Chronicles of Young Scientists (www.cysonline.org) Organization of Pharmaceutical unity with Bioallied Sciences (www.opubs.com)

These are international journal and 2 year old still not on wikipedia.

I also want to put coverpage and all relevant information as in already published pages. I try alot by creating pages .. wikipedia is so complex that It takes hours to properly add a page. But I dont why always in the page is deleted and suspended.

Wikipedia should create templates for such journal pages/societies, so that people can add up the details directly like ISSN number, coverpage etc..with no objections and complications..

if any one can help me in this then let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Himanshu18in (talk • contribs) 05:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Belonging to the same category as another article at Wikipedia means nothing. For example, I am a guitar player. So is Eric Clapton. There is an article at Wikipedia about Eric Clapton, but none about me. Why? Because there's lots of people who have written lots of books, magazine articles, newspaper articles, etc. about Eric Clapton. No one has written anything much about me at all. So I do not make a good subject for a Wikipedia article. The same thing is true for publications. Just because a journal exists doesn't mean that it gets a Wikipedia article about it. After all, I exist (at least, I am pretty sure that I do), and theres no reason to have a Wikipedia article about me. For your examples, the Journal of Organic Chemistry is a well known academic journal, published by the American Chemical Society. It is an "Eric Clapton"-type of journal based on its standing in the world. The journals you have posted above appear to be more like me: They certainly exist, but I don't see, as yet, any evidence that they are notable. For more information on Wikipedia's inclusion criteria, see Wikipedia:Notability. Please als note that creating new articles is literally the hardest thing there is to do correctly at Wikipedia. If you wish to contribute to Wikipedia, the better method as a new user is to find articles that already exist that you could contribute additional work to because of your interests or expertise. Once you learn more about Wikipedia over time, and learn what sorts of subjects make good subjects for new articles, then consider contributing new articles some time in the future. --Jayron32 06:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have replied on this user's talk page.Jasper Deng (talk) 06:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Jayron's answer. It is important to gather enough information before you start an article. There have been instances where I've waited over 2 years for enough information to be available to write a somewhat useful article. A good rule of thumb is to see if more than one independent source has mentioned the subject and answered the important questions (who are the editors, what is published, format, etc) - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 17:37, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Did I upload this image correctly?

Since every damn time I try to add an image to WP, even my own photos, I get told that it has to be deleted for this reason or that one, could someone check File:FishOutOfWater DVD cover.jpg to see if I've dotted all the Is and crossed the Ts? Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 09:06, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good to me, but perhaps you could reference exactly where you got the DVD cover in source, say, if you got it from a website, link to the exact location of the image on the website. Hope this helps. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 09:28, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding thumb nail image

Problem was only file name and caption appeared in a box - not the image Ganymede1969 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ganymede1969 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Before an image can be used in a Wikipedia article, it must be uploaded - see WP:UPLOAD. No image named File:Acorn_Can._Wiki.jpg has been uploaded either here or at WikiMedia Commons. Have you typed the name correctly? Is this a file that is still on your computer? -- John of Reading (talk) 11:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look, I think the file name might be incorrect, but I couldn't find any filename anything close to that, might not yet be uploaded. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:02, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ganymede: I'm just wondering if it might be a file you have on your own computer, and you thought you could somehow reference it directly in the article? You need to upload it first. --ColinFine (talk) 16:03, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Translated BLP's "lacking" sources

Can you please help. I'm having difficulty finding whether BLP-PROD applies in cases where a page has been translated from a foreign-language Wikipedia.

For example, in this page, I added the {{translated page}} tag myself in line with the opening edit summary and an interwiki ref added by the article creator. As such, I had no way of knowing from which version of the sister page this article had been translated. As well, even with Google translator, it is still uncertain which sources listed on the sister page reference the translated version or even if they are/were reliable sources referencing anything. At the moment, the page is tagged as a translation and as a BLP lacking sources.

I'm wondering, therefore, whether there is a guideline or policy that covers situations like this. Does BLP-PROD still apply? Where should the article be sent: Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English or Category:BLP articles lacking sources? Somewhere else?

For the record, I'm not trying to delete the article. I'm just looking for guidance on how to proceed?

Thank you LordVetinari (talk) 11:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too sure. I tried to have a look at the reference on Thai Wikipedia, but the link is broken, and I did a quick Google search but came up with nothing much except facebook and wordpress. I had a look in Google Books and Scholar and there did seem to be some mention of them, but I wasn't able to access a lot of content on them. Not too sure if they meet notability criteria. Not too sure what to do here, perhaps send to AFD and see what happens. Generally people at AFD will have a closer look and see if they can find any sources for the article, I did have a look but came up with very little, but perhaps someone else could find more. Sorry I couldn't be more helpful. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 11:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact there is a foreign article means little as any number of policy failures on the other site could've gone by unnoticed. Assuming it has a legitimate reason to exist, I'd recommend asking a related WikiProject and Wikipedians who speak the language fluently to weigh in. Foreign sources are totally acceptable, but obviously something in English is preferred. - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. LordVetinari (talk) 07:36, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regular Google searches may give you something; he seems to be known in other countries. See this article from New Zealand. We do have an article on the Asian Human Rights Commission, and he may be connected with them. EdJohnston (talk) 03:46, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right place for discussion of article feedback tool

Resolved

What is considered the right place to bring up comments, ideas, criticism and suggestions related to the Article Feedback Tool? Would that be this page? I am still a bit confused about the purpose of this tool. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 12:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that would be the place to give feedback on the tool. I've only seen the feedback tool once, from the looks of it, it's a sort of survey to gauge what readers think of an article in terms of quality. That's what it looks like to me, anyway. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 12:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the box at the top of the page says, that page is for telling "the Wikimedia Tech team what issues you encounter". I think that it would be more appropriate to bring up comments and ideas on this page, as per the "How can I send comments and feedback?" section on this FAQ page. ajmint (talk•edits) 12:52, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I moved my comment here. Thanks. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 13:19, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How could I read Wikibooks on my kindle E-book reader?

I'm curious about the format of Wikibooks. Can I specify the output format of the PDF file generated by using the "Create books tool"? I think most readers like me would prefer to read these articles on their E-book readers. So, if PDF of A4 size is suitable for laptop, the 6 inch size of PDF would be good for most E-book readers. Sure, I can use other tool to convert books from A4 size to other size. However, the format of the text is not remained. Please consider to add the second size format in the PDF output or it would be great to see a fourth format designed for E-book readers.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Liuzhencc (talk • contribs) 12:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Larry T. Gell

Larry T. Gell is the (Founder 1990) Director-General of IAED International Agency for Economic Development. Global Economic Development Projects and the world's first weekly UN TV Broadcasts/Webcasts:"INSIDE THE UNITED NATIONS: The Global Issues" http://www.iaed.org President of Gell Associates & Co. Inc. (Founded in 1960) and President of Gell International Group (Founded in 1970) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.1.28 (talk) 16:23, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to have an article about this person created in Wikipedia (I guess that's the purpose of this question), then you will have to provide evidence of that persons notability by providing reliable, Third-party sources. If you have such sources, you could submit your article by following the steps at Articles for creation. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Submitting a Photo

Hello, I tried to place a photo on our page and got a message of Copyright Infringement. I tried to put a photo under our martial arts association page for the Founder: Ngo Dong, Ph.D. of Cuong Nhu Oriental Martial Arts Association.

We have a web site: http://www.cuongnhu.com/Default.aspx

This photo we own and it is property of our Martial Arts organization. There was no photo undeer Ngo Dong's Profile at all today. What do we have to do to clear this and get approved? We can submit documentation if necessary to release this photo for your site.

Please advise further, Thank You, Respectfully, Helen Moore, Nidan Black Belt Instructor Cuong Nhu Oriental Martial Arts Association —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladysensei (talk • contribs) 18:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you place content on Wikipedia, you agree to license it to others under the Creative Commons 3.0 License - effectively saying that you no longer hold the copyright on the content.Jasper Deng (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. CTJF83 19:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper, your advice is a bit backwards: in order to be allowed to place copyright material on Wikipedia you must explicitly licence it under a suitable licence. This does not say that you no longer hold the copyright, but it does permit the material to be used by anybody for any purpose, as long as the conditions of the licence are complied with. Helen, see WP:IOWN for how to do this. --ColinFine (talk) 22:34, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firefox 4.0 not "remembering me" on Windows 7 system

Resolved

I have been using Firefox 4.0.1 on a Windows XP system and it was working correctly on Wikipedia. Now I'm using it on a Windows 7 system, and it won't "remember me" at login. IE 9 on this system does remember me. I tried starting Firefox in safe mode without add-ons, but that didn't help. Does anyone know how this can be fixed? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 19:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do other websites "remember" you? Regards So Why 19:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just got this set up about 2 hours ago, so I haven't been to many websites, but Amazon seems to remember. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 19:32, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have FF 4 and Windows 7 and have no problem. Are you blocking cookies from Wikipedia?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cleared the cookies and now it is working. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 20:14, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright of a YouTube image

I screen-captured an image of a guest on What's My Line (from about 1956), from a YouTube video. And I plan to use it in an article on Wikipedia. I assume that this image is not the property of YouTube or of the person who submitted the video to YouTube. Can I legally upload this image to Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Acf-jimloy (talk • contribs) 20:45, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might be able to use it under fair use, but the image is still owned by whoever owns the copyright for that television show. BurtAlert (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Someone owns the copyright to the video. The image you captured is part of that video. Unless the copyright owner has given an appropriate Wikipedia-approved license to use the image, you can't upload it. That's my view. If you want more input, you could ask at WP:MCQ. Also, other editors here may chime in.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) If you are using an image of Tom Wiswell, it would be ok under fair use cause he is dead. I'd try and find a non-youtube image though. CTJF83 20:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why would whether the person's alive have anything to do with it?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because it is impossible to take a new free image a of a dead person. See WP:NFC#UUI and WP:NFCC both #1 CTJF83 22:00, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c)For a living person a free photo could almost always be made; so by WP:NFCC#1 a non-free image of a living person is acceptable only under rare circumstances. (The converse, however, is not necessarily true.) —teb728 t c 22:05, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with TEB728. It may be impossible to take a new free image of a dead person, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to find a free image of a dead person. And, either way, fair use isn't automatic just because the subject in the image is dead.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:22, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I said you can't take a new image of a dead person...and them being dead would justify using a fair use image. CTJF83 22:25, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless free-to-use images also exist of the dead person. File:John F. Kennedy, White House color photo portrait.jpg is a free image, so trying to upload a copyrighted image to use in its place is definately against the rules, even though the person so pictured is dead. Being dead doesn't mean that Wikipedia's policies magically go out the window... --Jayron32 23:21, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And to amplify teb728's point, the policy says use of images of a live person is rarely fair. Nowhere does it say use of images of a dead person is fair. And in the context of fair use, it's not reasonable to assume the converse. Fair use is not about I can infringe someone's copyright because I can't find anything comparable.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:33, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

JFK is a poor example there are only X number of dead presidents and other dead people with free images already available. It says if there are no free images or none can be easily obtained, then you can use a non-free fair use image. CTJF83 00:56, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming you're referring to this sentence: "Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." If so, that's part of one of 10 criteria, all of which have to be met to establish fair use.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:16, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any of WP:NFCC it violates...but the original poster hasn't responded at all, so we are all veering way off course here. CTJF83 01:27, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's impossible to know whether it satisfies the other criteria without more information. I agree with you, though, that we've taken a rather extended detour into the abstract.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:31, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updating accessdate

If I revise an article, and in the course of doing so I read and verify an external link, should I change accessdate to today's date? It seems to me like the best use of the field is to show the reader the most recent date that anyone retrieved the source and verified that it still contains what it is cited for, not to show the date it was originally inserted into the article. It may not be customary, though, and it might even look to someone like the editor was taking credit for the original effort of finding the source. Is there an established rule? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Turner (talk • contribs) 23:43, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite says "accessdate: Full date when URL/DOI was last checked. Should use the same format as the other full dates in the references. Must not be wikilinked." GB fan (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The moral is don't check the link or you'll have to update the accessdate. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 23:59, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or archive the link on WebCite, remove the accessdate field and add in |archiveurl and |archivedate fields. Then noone will have to update it ever again! woo... doomgaze (talk) 00:02, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't tried since I installed Firefox 4, but WebCite never worked for me with FF 3.x. I always had to use IE, which I hate.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You tried it with Google Chrome? doomgaze (talk) 01:52, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have Chrome. I keep IE around for websites that don't work correctly with Firefox. There are fewer and fewer of them, but they still exist.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:18, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it's a good thing to do, but don't reverse it. If a link doesn't work on the last check, don't delete it. You might have hit temporary trouble. Also, use WebCite and save an exact copy of the source. That way updating the accessdate will not be necessary. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:35, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 May 21