Help desk
< August 9	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 11 >

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 10

Adding my Gamer Tag

Someone keeps adding my Xbox gametag to wikipedia to all these famous people, so im getting hundreds of invites, and i have to go and remove my gamertag... please can i get a ban on my gametag name... gamertag is Alkamist, so please can we get a stop or what? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alkamist (talk • contribs) 00:05, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see at Special:Contributions/Alkamist that you have fixed all three current occurrences. Thanks for that. One of them was added in November 2010 [1] and unfortunately not discovered. The two other were added three days ago by 174.96.230.92. I have warned the vandal at User talk:174.96.230.92. Have you removed or seen other occurrences in the past? Checking millions of edits for all sorts of vandalism can be expensive so it's usually limited to quite persistent problems. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:26, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Table

In table, how can one cell of the last row can automatically calculate the sum of all the cells of the column above it? Xaris333 (talk) 01:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not have such a feature. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's something that would realy be helpful, go to WP:VPP and suggest it.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading a photograph

In our family archives, we have a photograph from 1934 (est.) that seems relevant to the article on John Marre ( John Marre ). We have this photograph because my father was a member of the team. He is included in the photo. Insofar as we are aware, all members of that team, and likely the photographer as well, are deceased. Also, insofar as we are aware, the photograph was never published. It was just a team photo, that my father kept with his personal papers up until his death in 1978. As his children, we are the owners. Can this legally be uploaded, and then inserted into the article indicated above? Thank you.Rgregory6 (talk) 03:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can upload it, but first you have to donate the copyright so it is under our licenses. See WP:Donating copyrighted materials to do so. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 05:33, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I did upload it, but it needs to be rotated, which I unsuccessfully tried to do. Could you help?Rgregory6 (talk) 13:04, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The image really needs to be converted into a JPG file and uploaded again. I can do that as soon as the questions raised at the Commons Help Desk have been resolved.--ukexpat (talk) 15:00, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright is owned by the photographer or his heirs, not the owner of a copy of the photo. You need permission from the copyright owner to upload it. Rmhermen (talk) 16:05, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest that we let the discussion continue at Commons Help Desk? – ukexpat (talk) 16:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Either location is fine with me: what it boils down to is that there appears not to be a hard and fast rule in place. If "the copyright is owned by the photographer or his (sic) heirs," and if that form of ownership (however "ownership" is explicated here) is crucial, then there is nothing to discuss. But the situation is as I describe it above: approx. 80 years old, no evidence that it was ever published, no information concerning the photographer or the circumstances under which the photo was taken (e.g. perhaps the photograph was purchased from the photographer), etc. We have no way of knowing some of the relevant facts. So, in a case like this, for wikipedia, who adjudicates?Rgregory6 (talk) 17:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem here is that the photo appears to be unpublished, which tends to give it longer copyright protection in the United States. Had it been published, it would be much more likely that the photo already would be in the public domain, but as an unpublished photo, there is not really any chance that the copyright has expired. Also see WP:NFCC#4: fair use on English Wikipedia is not applicable unless you can prove that the photo has been published or displayed publicly. There are also other requirements for fair use and I'm not sure how you were planning to use the photo. The intended use of the photo might also fail fair use rules for some other reason. --Stefan2 (talk) 19:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I feel that we don't have sufficient information in order to keep this image, so I have proposed it for deletion: Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:John Marre's Soccer Team Circa 1934.pdf. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:01, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had uploaded a derivative (rotated) version before I read this. That will fail permission as well. Finavon (talk) 20:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Intended use is and has only been addition to the already existing article on John Marre, an article which is exceedingly slim and lacking in support, from any quarter. Yes, I acknowledge that I cannot prove it has never been published, although it is a reasonable inference that team photos, which this clearly is, were at some point in time, displayed publicly. From my reading of wikipedia, I doubt that you have proper evidence for most of the photos on display; you take the word of the person who submits them, make a few reasonable inferences, and probably wait to see whether any challenges are forthcoming. For this relatively obscure little corner of the universe, concerning people long dead, to say that, yes, it was publicly displayed in the early 1930s and that no one holds the copyright are both extremely reasonable inferences. Assuming the truth of both of these inferences, and the likelihood that very few wikipedia images are immue to challenge, what's the problem?Rgregory6 (talk) 22:23, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

marketswiki

Is Marketswiki and MarketReformWiki related to or affiliated with the Wikipedia group?

Sam — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.131.73.130 (talk) 05:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, they're both run by johnlothian.com. Rojomoke (talk) 06:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Schofield: Researcher and Campaigner

I have just written my first /second original entry and it has been rejected because of lack of references. I have a number of references within the text which do not seem to show up at the end but do work as links and I wondered what I did wrong. There is also a bibliography of works. I am really not sure what I have done wrong or how I can make the references I have used more explicit. Bailey Chipping--Bailey Chipping (talk) 05:41, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The links you've added there are simply links to other Wikipedia articles and Wikipedia can't reference itself, we require references to be to "a reliable published source using an inline citation" per WP:V. I'll have a look for you in a minute and see if I can find any refs. Valenciano (talk) 06:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay here's the problem, the person certainly sounds like he should be notable, however no online sources are coming up for him beyond a brief mention about his appearances in various panels or in unreliable sources. It's complicated by the fact that he shares his name with a popular TV character played by an actor subjected to online rumours about his sexuality, but even taking that away from the searches, nothing comes up. It's quite possible that he gets some kind of in depth coverage in an offline source such as a newspaper, however you'd need to search for that and add it to the article. Valenciano (talk) 06:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pertaining to the United States of America page.

If I may be so humble as to suggest, that someone change the model of the American writer from Jack Kerouac to John Steinbeck. I am suggesting this, not because of my opinion; Jack Kerouac was a fantastic writer. Yet, he is already listed in the front page for notable French Canadians. It just seems a bit repetitive, when someone who isn't mentioned on the list of notable writers for the United States is John Steinbeck. Who we all know contributed greatly to depression-era literature. ^[1] ^[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.56.3.109 (talk) 07:43, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Im not sure what you mean by "the model" but I guess you refer to the photo of Jack Kerouac in United States#Literature, philosophy, and the arts. Jack Kerouac and John Steinbeck are each mentioned in hundreds of Wikipedia articles. Steinbeck is mentioned more than Kerouac in American literature. I don't see the relevance of Kerouac's mention in French Canadian to the choice of photo in United States#Literature, philosophy, and the arts. You can post a suggestion to Talk:United States with the "New section" tab. Note that the quality of the best available photo with a permitted license is also a factor. Link to the photo you suggest. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page Vandalism

My name is Vassal Benfor, My page has been vandalized by Mikehawk78 I do not know who this person is but It seems to be a stalker. I am as well known producer and ask that my page be kept private. The long name you are refering to was place on my page by this person It was hacked.... I ask that you address this problem — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.81.92 (talk) 08:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~If this is the change you are referring to [2], then I believe you made it yourself. Mdann52 (talk) 08:49, 10 August 2012 (UTC)~~[reply]

User had been blocked. Mdann52 (talk) 08:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

jim varney article

this may be small, and uninportant, but when you italicase the words "Ernest", it looks like "Emest". maybe you don't have to, you already color and bold it, that should be suffcient. thanks. guy from canada named des — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.161.81.3 (talk) 11:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to "Other roles". Thanks for the observation--SPhilbrick (Talk) 15:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Allowing the PLAY on words within Wiki

Unfortunately, the author of this message is unskilled in the art editing Wikipedia. I also do not hold advanced knowledge of the proper definitions and terms used to interact within the wonderful world of Wikipedia.

I humbly ask that a person with more Wiki skill / knowledge read the following and take up the cause to differentiate between a misrepresented play on two words. The flaw contained within this particular Wiki reference was (it appears) initiated and created by an auto bot / spider relying on meta tags of description / key words. A real person of character, common sense and reasoning needs to contest this reference by editing it (within Wiki) in the correct manner. That person who takes up this cause will be assisting / helping to define the true definition of purpose and employment for over 100,000 (actual people) 'appraisers across the United States.

May we start with the Wiki Link:

Then continue to the definition(s) of (and play-on) two particular words (assessor) vs. (appraiser)

(def) assessor: 1-The head of an assessment agency: sometimes used collectively to refer to all administrators of the assessment function. 2-One who discovers, lists, and values real property for ad valorem taxation.

(def) appraiser: One who is expected to perform valuation services (typically on a fee basis) competently and in a manner that is independent, impartial and objective.

The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal – Appraisal Institute: ISBN 0-922154-72-4

OBJECTION to Wiki Reference: The person described in the Wiki reference has held a long-term political office in Brevard County, FL. (This appointment has a very good chance of changing in the upcoming election (fall of 2012). For ongoing years, with the help of the manifestation of / improvements of the internet, the continued mis-use / misrepresentation of the word appraiser has been used as a public relations prop to downplay political exposure and a supposition of integrity. This misrepresentation by the tax assessor (actually calling himself an appraiser) allows political gain and helps to remove the negative edge from and desensitizes the stigma and reputation that tax assessors / collectors have had since the Holy Bible was written.

Book of Luke – Tax Collector

Officially, the specific office held is a locally elected office under Florida Statues provided by The Florida Legislature through The Florida Department of Revenue (governing body). In Florida there are some 67 counties, each with its own tax assessor. In contrast, by definition & distinction, there are some 1000-3000+/- appraisers for every tax assessor across the U.S. Over the years, the tax assessor in Brevard County, FL has very effectively blurred and amplified the use of the word (appraiser) and effectively incorporated the word (appraiser) into a personal (office) advantage. The continuation of this misrepresentation allows convoluted confusion to the average reader / user attempting to differentiate definitions between an assessor and an appraiser.

This may lead to a false perception / understanding (mislead the reader / user), allowing the office of the tax assessor to hold a condescending position over any / all fee appraisers in a conjectural manner. The tax assessor is not the chief nor the head appraiser within any use of, or stretch of the term.

Please refer to another Wiki reference which explains an appraiser responsibility in much greater detail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_estate_appraisal

In reality, tax assessing is a science evolving around advanced / improved computer (mathematical / statistical) technology to assign a tax(able) value to each and every tax(ed) parcel of real estate. All tax assessment activity is dictated by the individual (states) departments of revenue. In other words, the focus is revenue.

In contrast, appraising is an art, officially utilizing at least one of three valuation techniques, typically arriving at / estimating a value based on real time (real estate) market fluxuations. An appraiser considers a value by drilling deep into the individual facts / documentation / support of an individual property and should most certainly (under moral guidelines) consider if the market is currently being driven by liquidation type sales vs. arms length transactions (a notating of the (real time data generated - up / down curvature (fluxuations) within the marketplace). An appraiser also considers many other opposite aspects / idiosyncrasies of the subject property in contrast to a tax assessors intent dictated by taxation authority.

Differentiating between definition / intent and purpose is very important because as mentioned, the tax assessor (formally submits) to a department of revenue, the tax appraiser submits to the Uniformed Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).

Appraisal Institute - USPAP

A (fee) appraiser changes perspective 365 days a year vs. the tax assessor bases annual tax valuation on one day a year (Jan 1st). As is evident, valuation for taxation purposes is for a different reason and intent than valuation based on a current data processing within the real estate marketplace.

Once again, the author humbly requests that the reader of this explanation, please consider the mental task and this on-point distinction (a brief version of the essential meaning of something) and the corresponding distinction (between these 2 words).

It is respectfully requested that such distinction and conclusion be made to correct the Wiki reference referred to, or such reference should be stricken from online publication. A much more defined definition needs to be in place to adequately inform the reader / user.

Thank You (whoever you are) in advance for your time / effort / consideration and research into this politically contrived deviation. Your mental awareness is appreciated and respected by accepting the mental challenge to help set the record straight within the very important world of Wikiukexpat (talk) 13:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.88.98.211 (talk) 12:16, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is all a bit WP:TLDR I am afraid, but in any event, dictionary definitions aside, the office is called "Appraiser" (see https://www.brevardpropertyappraiser.com/mainhtml/appraiser_job.asp00), so there is not much we can do about that. As for the Brevard Property Appraiser article, I don't think that the subject is notable enough for its own article so I have redirected it to Brevard County, Florida#Elected officials. --ukexpat (talk) 13:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weird unified login problem

I've been a it.wikipedia.org user since 2006. Today I was about to edit an entry in en.wikipedia.org but I realized my username was not registered in it. I read the unified login page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Unified_login) and realized the reason is that my subscription to The Wikimedia Foundation was done before 2008. I therefore tried to complete the procedure to use my account in the other websites of The Wikimedia Foundation: it succeeded for everything but the en.wikipedia.org site.

I thought it's because some other user subscribed with the same name before 2008, and that actually seems to be true, but I also think that such a user is not active anymore; I'm thinking this because before realizing that another user could have the same username, I tried to reset the password (thinking I simply forgot it) but the procedure wouldn't work saying that a user with such a name doesn't exist.

So, if I got it right, there has been a user in en.wikipedia.org with the same username i have in it.wikipedia.org but he/she unsubscribed (resetting the password says there's not this user) and now I cannot synchronize the 2 accounts because I'm somehow stucked in this kind of limbo :)

Can anybody confirm my thoughts are true and, if so, is there any way to fix my problem?

Oh, the username is Smartdust

Cheers

--78.13.165.52 (talk) 15:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since that user only made three edits over two days in 2006, you may be able to usurp the name (though it might be less likely to happen than if the user had zero edits). - Purplewowies (talk) 15:27, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts cannot be deleted (but they can be renamed) and you cannot "unsubscribe". The English Wikipedia account User:Smartdust has not set an email address so password reset is not possible. Perhaps you got a message about that when you tried. It's optional to give an email address. As the above reply says, you can try to usurp the name. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Thanks for the replies. I'll try out the usurpation procedure then :) --78.13.165.52 (talk) 07:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Son of BOSS

Can someone please stop the IP from adding unsourced information at Son of BOSS? Like this? I think I'm at three reverts already. Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel that there is too much to keep up with, you can request page protection at WP:RFPP. Otherwise, you'll have to just warn the IP with a WP:VANDALISM template on their talk page. Dismas|^(talk) 18:02, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it legitimate to edit others' sandbox? + A question about AFC

Up to what limit can I edit another user's sandbox to help them while they are preparing an article using it.
Can you please answer this question?

Thank you ···Vanischenu^「m/_Talk」 16:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1. There is no formal limit. The wishes of the user whose sandbox you are editing should pertain. While no user "owns" a page, there is much leeway given to sandbox and other user pages. So, if the user welcome help, you are as free to do so as you would be on any article; if the user does not want help, I would be inclined to back off until the sandbox page is moved to article space. You can always make suggestions, however. Bielle (talk) 17:02, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited sandbox articles before without the permission of the user but it is generally because they are doing something in it that is affecting articles or the project in general outside of their sandbox. For instance, and this is probably the most wide spread offense, when the user puts their sandbox into a category that is meant for regular articles. I will generally comment out the categories and alert the user on their talk page. Dismas|^(talk) 18:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, though rather than commenting out such categories, I'd suggest just inserting a colon. That way there's at least a one-way clicable linkage (to the category page from the sandboxed article). Once moved to mainspace it's a simple matter to remove the colons.LeadSongDog come howl! 18:36, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. So I should seek permission from the user for editing the sandbox to Wikify it and make it follow MoS.···Vanischenu^「m/_Talk」 05:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please answer the following question by a new user? It is about the AFC submission of his sandbox. He has been working hard on it throughout.

I've clicked create for my entry, it said there were 600 entries in front of mine for consideration. Where can I check the status of my entry?

Would be very helpful for him as he has got disappointed many times. ···Vanischenu^「m/_Talk」 05:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Celtic Cross-Roads", 2003 - Martyn Richards

The above-named Paper was written at the request of the then Herbert Art Gallery & Museum, then a department of Coventry City Council. It was written as part of a Consultation, deemed timely as The Lunt 'Roman' Fort at Baginton was closed for several months due to wear and tear requiring repairs before it could be safely re-opened to the public.

Others included in the Consultation were Keevill Heritage and, as I was informed, English Heritage. My Paper included research which recorded the Celtic Corieltauvi people migrating from Leicester, the Celtic Cornovii from their capital at Viriconium, the Celtic Dobunni from Corinium and the Celtic Catuvellauni as coming from the south-east, converging towards Covan-tre, thus the title "Celtic Cross-Roads".

Copies of this Paper were distributed by me to The Herbert Art Gallery & Museum, Coventry, The British Library System including its Legal Deposit Office in Wetherby, 2003/2004, the then City Centre Company in Coventry - CV-One - and a number of other recipients.

I have the name of the Officer at The Herbert who asked me to write the Paper in my research packet.

- Martyn Richards

PS. Acknowledgements to helpers, written or oral, were included in the text.

"Celtic Cross-Roads", Martyn Richards 2003. Copies sold at Coventry Godiva Festivals and Craft Fairs Coventry & Warwickshire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.162.86.24 (talk) 17:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does your question relate to a particular article?--ukexpat (talk) 17:32, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

and is it a question? Maproom (talk) 20:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BBC trying to sensationalise Wikipedia

The BBC website [3] is trying to sensationalise the fact that Mitt Romney's article has been semi-protected - without mentioning that Barack Obama's article has the same level of protection - where should this be reported? - Arjayay (talk) 19:08, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They do it all the time. We can't and shouldn't report it anywhere. Ryan Vesey 19:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If that is policy, can you point me to where it says so? - Arjayay (talk) 19:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unaware of a policy. Wikipedia has no control over external content. Ryan Vesey 19:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And if we start making a mountain out of a molehill, they will think that there really is something to it. So I suggest that we comment on it no further.--ukexpat (talk) 19:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. In fact, I didn't think the article was terrible or overly sensational. Ryan Vesey 19:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, the BBC story apparently refers to the August 7 episode mentioned at Vandalism on Wikipedia#Stephen Colbert. Some articles were indeed semi-protected because of that but Mitt Romney was already semi-protected so nothing changed there. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:59, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTNEWS has a bit of relevance. Though only tangentially. Dismas|^(talk) 20:02, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK I suggest we let this be otherwise it is in danger of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.--ukexpat (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded a picture but can not place it where I want.

This is the url I want to edit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansfield,_Ohio

I uploaded the file. This is the url of the photo I want to add to above.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c4/Shirley_Schluter_SAFETY_TOWN_Class_of_1937.jpg

I want a thumbnail to the right of the text below SAFETY TOWN. The description should read.

Shirley (Yoakam) Schluter was among the first Safety Town graduates in 1937.

I have permission from the subjects daughter to use the photo in the Mansfield, Ohio wiki.

I am really lost. Could someone move the picture for me?

TheMalabarFlash (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The picture is here File:Shirley Schluter SAFETY TOWN Class of 1937.jpg. If you edit the article and add this text [[File:Shirley Schluter SAFETY TOWN Class of 1937.jpg|thumb|right|Your caption here]], then the image will appear. More help on the parameters you can use to change the way the image is displayed can be found here WP:EIS QU ^TalkQu 22:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Original research?

Could someone please check if this article contains WP:OP? It's Giovanni di Giovanni. I actually tried to re-write it, but the possibilities are limited, since article mostly depents on one reference (an Oxford University Press book). 178.223.223.170 (talk) 23:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French-Canadian

[2] ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States

[1]

[2]