Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 8: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Technical 13 (talk | contribs) m Archive header update. using AWB |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 12:
I understand, however I see studio photos all over Wiki. Why can't I use an old studio photo? thanks, [[User:Kristi Schneider|Kristi Schneider]] ([[User talk:Kristi Schneider|talk]]) 21:10, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
:Hi Kristi. I actually teach my adoptees a [[User:Worm That Turned/Adopt/Copyright|lesson on copyright]] which you may find useful. Basically, whenever someone takes a photo or creates an image, they own the rights to it. They can produce copies, sell them or publish them however they like, whilst retaining the right to produce more. Wikipedia is a "free" encyclopedia, so we only use photos which are free. That means the creator has released the photo under a license such as [[WP:CC-BY-SA]], which effectively means we can use it as long as we say where it came from. We have lots of these pictures on Wikipedia Commons.
:Now, there are some exceptions where we can use non-free images, and only when they meet the [[WP:NFCC|Non-free content critera]]. Such as "There is not and cannot possibly be a free equivalent," "The original produce cannot lose out," and "We use the image as little as we possibly can." These may explain the "studio photos" you see all over Wikipedia. Does that make sense? Oh and by the way, you can use an "old" studio photo, assuming its copyright has expired - and that's quite complicated and [[List of countries' copyright length|depends on what country the image is from]]. [[User:Worm That Turned|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
== Wonderfully horrible ==
Line 108:
the article "Return on Social Business" is pending review. I've added more references --- and can add more. Do I need to be putting links for related Wikipedia articles? Advice is greatly appreciated. [[User:HalSchlenger|HalSchlenger]] ([[User talk:HalSchlenger|talk]]) 23:45, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
:Hi Hal! I looked over your article a bit just now, and did some searches through your sources, and through Google. I don't actually see the "Return on Social Business" metrics you're describing mentioned in any of them. And it doesn't seem to be a very widespread term on the internet as a whole. Could you point me to some reliable sources that describe this metric, which might prove its notability? Cheers, - '''[[User:Jtmorgan|J-Mo]]''' [[User talk:Jtmorgan|<
J-Mo, thanks for your time reviewing. "Social business" is a term that is replacing "Enterprise 2.0" and "Social collaboration." The Forbes article [http://www.forbes.com/sites/forrester/2012/04/03/delivering-the-social-business-imperative/] from last week again speaks to this. There are various articles about the challenges for calculating the ROI for these efforts, and we wanted to share thoughts about it. So two thoughts:
1) Should we pursue an article on 'return on social business' or 'return on __?___', or
Line 117:
:Hal, reading through your proposal again, it seems to me like you're making an argument for the adoption of this particular metric, RoSB, by social business companies. Your article proposal is well-written, but I'm concerned that it seems like what we call [[WP:OR|original research]] around here. Basically, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so Wikipedia articles should not make new arguments or present new research findings that aren't already published in other reliable sources (such as academic journals, magazines, newspapers, books, conference proceedings, etc). This article reads ''to me'' as though it is proposing this new metric and attempting to demonstrate its utility. That's a job for a research paper, not an encyclopedia article I think. Once the metric has been widely adopted, an article could be written that described its genesis, its history and its quality. Does that make sense? Am I reading things right?
:There is an article on [[Social business]], by the way. Perhaps you could give that article a look and see if any of the citations you've gathered would be appropriate there? Anyways, hopefully your next AfC reviewer will have some other specific ideas for you. Feel free to come back here if you have more questions, or to let us know how things are going! - '''[[User:Jtmorgan|J-Mo]]''' [[User talk:Jtmorgan|<
== Pros and cons of using your real name as your UserID ==
Line 142:
::Hi Bruce! I haven't had problems using a portion of my name as my username, which identifies me as a female. Like the others, I believe in that transparency that's associated with this decision. --[[User:Rosiestep|Rosiestep]] ([[User talk:Rosiestep|talk]]) 02:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
*Hi Bruce, you seem to have struck a chord here. As you can see, my username is Worm That Turned - which is quite an unusual internet handle. I've used it since 1998, so it was logical to bring it here when I came on to wikipedia. I have a very common name - indeed, my real name is actually registerred as a user account (by someone else!), so using my alias actually gives a lot more authenticity and accountability than that. It's not hard to find out all sorts of information about me, from this alias. <br> I'd actually go on to say that both the old guard and the new guard (I'm not sure which I fit in!) have multiple users who use their real names, and a large amount who don't. I don't think it makes a huge difference how long you've been here. [[User:Worm That Turned|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
I use my real name, and in editing Wikipedia, always have. I do partly just because Wikipedia editing is closely tied to the real world for me - I first started editing for a class assignment, and am heavily involved in real world outreach type things. I've run in to few problems with using my name, including a situation a while ago where I annoyed a bunch of lunatics who started attempting to harass me in real life - but overall I'm still quite glad I edit under my real name. (Bilby's reasons above also resonate with me.) [[User:Kgorman-ucb|Kevin (kgorman-ucb)]] ([[User talk:Kgorman-ucb|talk]]) 19:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Line 163:
how do you move an article from sand box to share??[[User:Yuzenasjohnston|Yuzenasjohnston]] ([[User talk:Yuzenasjohnston|talk]]) 12:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
:Hi Yuzenasjohnston, to move a page from sandbox to mainspace you need to "[[WP:MOVE|Move]]" it. You'll find an option (titled 'Move') at the upper right side of your screen (for default vector skin, at least), click on it and follow the instruction.[[User:Bill william compton|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
== Declined article ==
Line 182:
It looks like you've done a decent job on your current submission. I'd accept it, especially because no one is going to perfect their first article the first time around. But, I don't do Articles for Creation review, so sorry! Also, the two links that Soft shared about, I don't think you need to worry about those here (you aren't writing about yourself or a relative, from what I can tell). Anyway, the figure seems notable to me, and I'm not Malayalee. IMHO, if the article is on Malayalam, and after looking at the article history, it has had no problems, then I think it should be included on English Wikipedia. The context is obvious - he's a [[popular science]] writer and has won notable awards from India. I don't get a lot of hits since I only speak English. Any problems let me know MC, you can ping me on my talk page. Good luck, I hope it gets accepted this round!<small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User: SarahStierch | SarahStierch ]] ([[User talk: SarahStierch |talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/ SarahStierch |contribs]]) 14:41, 12 April 2012 (UTC) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
::I agree with Sarah here. [[User:Chicocvenancio|Chico Venancio]] ([[User talk:Chicocvenancio|talk]]) 17:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
:::Accepted. Congratulations :) [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
::::Huzzah! [[User:SarahStierch|Sarah]] ([[User talk:SarahStierch|talk]]) 19:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Line 215:
:The number of bytes is roughly corresponding to the number of characters. A '''[[byte]]''' usually consists of eight [[bit]]s, and ''"historically, a byte was the number of bits used to encode a single '''[[character (computing)|character]]''' of text in a computer"'' (from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia :)
:You can find ways of customizing this feature at [[Wikipedia:Added or removed characters]]. [[User:Benzband|<span style="color: green">benzband</span>]] ([[User talk:Benzband#Top|<span style="color: black">talk</span>]]) 14:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
:{{Ec}}Ah, well that's simple enough. A byte is a unit if digital information, which happens to be the equivalent of one ASCII character (letter or number). In fact, that's historically where a byte comes from, it was the number of bits that are required to encode one character. And if you're curious, a bit is a binary digit (a 1 or a 0), so a byte, made up of 8 bits, could be represented by a number between 0 and 255 - or allowed up to "256" letters. Woohoo! [[User:Worm That Turned|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
::Jeez, edit-conflicted twice. I give up. ;) [[User:Writ Keeper|Writ Keeper]] [[User Talk: Writ Keeper|⚇]][[Special:Contributions/Writ_Keeper|♔]] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 14:53, 12 April 2012 (UTC).</span><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:::Thats because we all want to answer that question! Itching for someone to ask it... [[User:Worm That Turned|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
== Question about Wikipedia Etiquette / Oversight ==
Line 241:
I am working on the existing article on the high school I graduated from oh, so long ago. I just installed an infobox on it and one of the fields is for an image of the mascot. Would it be "fair use" to use an image downloaded from the school city's website? If not, what do I have to do to get permission and transmit that forward to Wikipedia? I also need an image of the school, but live way to far away to go take one. The page in question is [[Hobart High School (Indiana)]].[[User:Gtwfan52|Gtwfan52]] ([[User talk:Gtwfan52|talk]]) 19:18, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
:First of all, that specific parameter is ''probably'' not used for actual images - that just expects you to input the name. Obviously, you could include an image of the mascot anywhere else, but no, the image from the school's site would not be useable under the fair use criteria. One of those criteria is that the image be "non-replaceable", and since it would be very easy to take a picture of the mascot (and therefore have a free image), it is ''not'' non-replaceable. Does that sorta make sense? I'm sure someone more knowledgeable with image might have more info. [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
::Well, I guess I should have been clearer. The "mascot" IS an image. There isn't some dude dressed up in a suit. I am not sure, but I do believe the school city did copyright the image a few years back, but I don't see how using it in an encyclopedia article about the school would be any different than using say [[Simplot]]'s logo in an encyclopedia article about them.[[User:Gtwfan52|Gtwfan52]] ([[User talk:Gtwfan52|talk]]) 20:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
:::Ahh, apologies then. In that case, since it is a copyright image and there's no way to get a free replacement, I imaging that it would be eligible under the fair use guidelines. Do you know how uploading works? [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
::::I have uploaded my own images, but I am pretty sure I can muddle my way thru it. Thank you for your help![[User:Gtwfan52|Gtwfan52]] ([[User talk:Gtwfan52|talk]]) 20:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Line 257:
I've just completed completed my first article. I wrote and formatted it in my Sandbox. I'm pleased with the way it looks and reads. I'm ready to move it to the English Wikipedia. How do I go about doing that?[[User:Jmolf|Jmolf]] ([[User talk:Jmolf|talk]]) 17:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
:{{done|[[Mark Olf{{!}}Done]]}}
::Now...how does Jmolf go about doing it in the future without needing help? :) [[User:SarahStierch|Sarah]] ([[User talk:SarahStierch|talk]]) 17:25, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
:::{{ec}}Hey, Jmolf, welcome back. You can move the article into mainspace by using the [[WP:MOVE|article move function]]. If you go to your sandbox, you'll see a little down-pointing triangle tab in the top-right corner of your screen, right next to the search bar. If you hover your mouse over this, a link that says "Move" will appear. Click on this, and it'll take you to the pagemove screen. Be sure to type in exactly the title you want in the "to new title" textbox, and (this is important) be sure to select (Article) from the pulldown menu next to it. Then, you can just click on move page, and you'll be good to go! [[User:Writ Keeper|Writ Keeper]] [[User Talk: Writ Keeper|⚇]][[Special:Contributions/Writ_Keeper|♔]] 17:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
:{{ec}} What Writ said. :) [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
::Hmm...Rcsprinter didn't actually move the page, if an admin wants to clean that up... [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
:::So that they'd still have a sandbox; if it was a regular userspace draft I would have moved.
::::Ahh, ok. Just wondered since the OP specifically referenced moving in his question. [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
== How can I have my article published, it is rejected due to inline citation issues, how do I fix this? ==
Line 290:
== Article as Advertisement? ==
<small>[[Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Folkstreams]] - [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
My article keeps being rejected for reading too much like an advertisement, but I'm at a loss as to how I can solve this? I've submitted it for review several times and no one gives me much advice on how to move forward with my article. I could really use some help.[[User:Holl!12|Holl!12]] ([[User talk:Holl!12|talk]]) 19:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
:Actually, that's not the only thing the final review says. It says you also need [[WP:RELIABLESOURCES]]. Every paragraph should have at least one citation that '''''proves''''' the information claimed/contained in the paragraph or sentence -- a reliable, hopefully independent, third-party sourse. You also need to weed out all the [[WP:PEACOCK]] terms and phrases: "far-flung", "recognized standing", etc. And all the seemingly blatant advertising like "YouTube offers a space for users comments" -- all of the stuff that appears meant to attract business rather than to be encyclopedic information in an encyclopedia. You also need to trim all that repetitive and overlong information in the Awards section, and all the puffery that accompanies it. Delete the title of the first section -- that is sheer advertising. Also, only the first word in a heading should be capitalized; don't use ampersands; don't use the word "Folkstreams" in a heading. Remove capital letters from the body text in the "Features" section. Delete all the members of the board of directors who do not have Wikipedia articles on them. Just state the facts; stop saying how great it is. Anyway, that would be a start. Hope that helps. [[User:Softlavender|Softlavender]] ([[User talk:Softlavender|talk]]) 23:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
::One more thing: right now only the [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10426054 NPR source] would be considered both reliable ''and'' independent. I have had to decline your submission because you just don't have enough good sources (like I said, only that one). All of the others sources are organizations that help, publish or have something to do with Folkstreams, and so are considered "primary" sources. These are fine for basic facts, but they don't help you to establish notability. Again, you need independent sources for that. Hope this helps :) [[User:Nolelover|'''<span style="color:FireBrick;">Nolelover
== Any advice on accidentally having published an article? ==
Line 303:
Is this what I should have done? Alternatively is there a way to "unpublish" the published article? The idea was to finish the draft in my Sandbox and request feedback here before publishing. [[User:Mav8|Mav8]] ([[User talk:Mav8|talk]]) 15:03, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
:This is a situation where my attitude is "Well, you can't break anything". You didn't actually publish it, someone else did, by moving it to the live space from the general sandbox, rather than your personal one. If you like, we can delete the article speedily under [[WP:CSD#G7]] (author requests deletion), and you can publish it when you're ready. [[User:Worm That Turned|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
::Oh, otherwise, I thought I should say I think you handled everything very well. [[User:Worm That Turned|<span style="text-shadow:gray 3px 3px 2px;"><
:::I've checked the improved article and removed the speedy tag, but it needs further editing to remove some writing that looks a little promotional. I'm working on it right now myself; I consider it worth the effort because it is probably notable. '''[[User:DGG| DGG]]''' ([[User talk:DGG| talk ]]) 15:34, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
::::Thanks for lending a hand DGG! [[User:SarahStierch|Sarah]] ([[User talk:SarahStierch|talk]]) 16:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Line 323:
Something like 2000 tonnes of Pu now exists in the world ..it is no longer a military secret ,indeed it seems to be moving into the economic sphere ,this being the case it is essential that the information in wikipedia is comprehensive and when uncertainty exists it is reported.
These two sections are anecdotal badly, sourced and misinformative,I am working on rewrites(see talk) but as a layperson with sporadic internet i may not be in the best position to do this.... jumblymamba[[User:Sebastian barnes|Sebastian barnes]] ([[User talk:Sebastian barnes|talk]]) 11:34, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
:Hello, Sebastian, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm afraid none of us here are experts on the matter, and this page is really for help with wikipedia itself. However, if I were you, and wanted to find the answer, I would ask at the article's talk page ([[Talk:Plutonium]]) or at the Science Reference Desk ([[WP:RD/S]]). You can also edit the pages yourself to correct information. Best of luck!
hi and hello thanks ive tried the talk ,i think due to the controvesal nature of the subject has been blocked..and my own lack of understanding.of how to work in wiki... no matter what worries me is that wiki pedia is continuing to show what anyone can see are far from complete balanced sections thanks again i will try the science desk 17:56, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
| |||