The University of Warwick is running a course on ‘Human Sexuality’ for third year BSc Psychology students, which involves editing Wikipedia articles.
If any of the students want to ask questions or need guidance, they are welcome to post on this page and I'll do my best to give answers.
Please add new posts at the bottom of the page and finish your post by signing with ~~~~ (four tildes which the MediaWiki software will expand into your username and a date stamp). --RexxS (talk) 21:45, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Creating a pdf edit
RexxS,
We have created a page in draft mode titled: Evolutionary Psychological and Biological Explanations for Prostitution. Here is the Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Evolutionary_Psychological_and_Biological_Explanations_for_Prostitution
Our instructor (Dr. Corey Fincher) has requested that we convert the page to PDF. it seems that the only way to do this, is to submit the article for review. I have initiated this process. Can you help us move the article into the Main Space, so we might make a PDF? Is there any alternative method for making a PDF?
Many Thanks & Kind Regards,
TSKang96 (talk) 12:20, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- @TSKang96: Yes, it's a nuisance that the Draft: namespace doesn't allow export. However, a simple work-around that any registered user can do is to copy the article into a sub-page of their own user space. I've made a copy of the current version of the article in your user space for you at User:TSKang96/Evolutionary Psychological and Biological Explanations for Prostitution. Now you can simply use the [Download as PDF] link almost at the bottom of the left-hand sidebar on that page. If you update the draft, you can always re-copy it into your user space to re-make the pdf. Let me know if you get any other problems. --RexxS (talk) 16:51, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Repeating references and inserting images edit
Hello RexxS
My group and I are editing the Error Management Theory page. I am wondering if you might be able to assist me with two questions..... firstly, our references keep repeating many, many times, but we cant work out how to edit them now they are in... and secondly, how do I add a graphic of Ebbinghaus Circles to the page as it has some relevance to what we are saying.
Kind regards
FlowerPower46 (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, FlowerPower46. First the repeating references at Error management theory. If you want to use the identical reference multiple times in the same article, we use a system called "named references", where we define the reference once and give it a "name" like this:
<ref name="Smith 2014">{{cite something |etc... }}</ref>. Then when we want to re-use that reference, we use the tag<ref name="Smith 2014" />and it will make a pointer to the reference we defined first. There's a good introduction to the topic at Wikipedia:Naming references for beginners if you want to learn more. As there's a mixture of refs you added and refs that others added, it was easiest for me to simply consolidate the references this time as a demonstration for you. You can see what I did in these diffs: - Obviously, I'd like you to take responsibility for consolidating duplicate references for yourselves in future, now that I've shown you how it's done. I'll also add that the convention on Wikipedia is to place references immediately after punctuation - see WP:REFPUNCT for the full guidance.
- Now for the graphics. Wikipedia does not allow you to embed external images in a page, unlike other websites. That means you have to first upload the image you wish to use to either Wikipedia or Commons, a sister project, which is a free media repository. However, as we already have an article on Ebbinghaus illusion, someone has already uploaded a graphic that you may use in the article: File:Mond-vergleich.svg. To display that image in an article, you would add the wiki-markup as follows:
[[File:Mond-vergleich.svg|thumb|Whatever caption you want]]
- In fact there are currently 11 related images on Commons at: c:Category:Ebbinghaus illusion. There's a good outline of the process of using images at Wikipedia:Picture tutorial. Hope that helps and let me know if you have any further problems. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 18:00, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Dear RexxS
Thank you very much for your help with the referencing, that was very much appreciated. And for the tips for next time. Also the graphic is now included. Many, many thanks.
With regards
FlowerPower46 (talk) 22:43, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
- @FlowerPower46: you're welcome. Today's tip is to have a look at the issue of capitals. Wikipedia uses capital letters much more sparingly than other resources you may be familiar with. All section headings are in sentence case, not title case, and even topics like "error management theory" are lower case for preference. If you are in any doubt about whether a word is a proper noun, check how it is used in the sources, but not in the titles of the sources; I mean in the actual text of the sources. I think you'll find that even Buss and Haselton use the term without capitals in the text of pmid:10653507. The guidance can be found at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 23:20, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi RexxS
Excellent. I will have a look at that for the final draft.
With regards
FlowerPower46 (talk) 09:13, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
Image licensing edit
Hello: I have a group of students that are hoping to use a graph from a published research article. They are seeking permission from the journal but is there any way they can still use the image if they properly attribute the source of the image without going through the hassle of seeking permission from the journal? The journal is Human Nature, currently produced by Springer. Mantiki (talk) 14:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Mantiki: If we only wanted to display something in Wikipedia, your idea might be feasible. However, Wikipedia has a goal of making its content re-usable by anybody under a free licence - such as CC-BY-SA. As the authors of the journal article almost certainly own the copyright to the image, they are the only people who can license the image for others to use. There's an overview at c:Commons:Licensing. Consequently we can't use an image of that sort in Wikipedia without the copyright owners explicit release of the image under a licence that allows anybody to re-use or adapt the image for any purpose whatsoever. The copyright owners would need to understand the background at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and you would need to work through the steps involved in Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. I agree that's a lot of learning just to use an image in an article, but Wikipedia takes copyright law very seriously and there's really no way around it. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:15, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Image upload problem edit
{from email} 15:19, 24 November 2016 LauraHarris wrote:
We are students from the University of Warwick and our wikipedia group was referred to you for help adding an image to our page. We are currently making amendments on the ‘Seduction’ page. However, we are having troubles with the copyright for an image we want to use. We have found this image from- Deighton, J., & Grayson, K. (1995). Marketing and seduction: Building exchange relationships by managing social consensus. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(4), 660-676. We have uploaded the image to the wiki commons page, but received an email regarding its copyright. We would be very grateful if you could help us out with this problem.
Many thanks -- Laura Harris
- 19:48, 25 November 2016 I replied:
- I've tracked down your upload to commons:File:Typology of ways to induce consumers to transact.jpg
- Assuming that's the right image, the problem is that you don't have permission to use that image on Wikimedia or on Commons. Permission to use the image is the right of the copyright holder.
- The copyright probably belongs to Deighton, J., & Grayson, K. and I don't suppose you've contacted them, asking them to release the image under a free licence?
- Experience suggests that the image will be deleted from Commons quite soon, and I don't believe there is any way to prevent that other than obtaining permission from whoever holds the copyright on the original.
- The only way around the issue that I can see is to write the stages as text (in your own words If possible) and include the text in the article. You would need to clearly atribute your source and provide a reference to the Journal where the original image can be found.
- You could write something along the lines of:
=== Typology of ways to induce consumers to transact === Deighton and Grayson created a flowchart which asked five questions to determine the type of the transaction:<ref>Deighton, J., & Grayson, K. (1995). Marketing and seduction: Building exchange relationships by managing social consensus. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(4), 660-676.</ref> 1 "Are the terms of the transaction unambiguous?" If unambiguous, and coercive, then that is "theft by force" or "theft by stealth". If unambiguous, but fair, then that is "trade with mutual gain". If the terms are ambiguous, question 2 applies. 2 "Does the consumer ..."
- and so on. Make sure any phrases that you are quoting directly are in quotes, and write in your own words as much as possible.
- This has the incidental advantage of making the section accessible to readers who are visually impaired and use assistive technology - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assistive_technology - which is one of our goals on Wikipedia. -- RexxS
- 11:25, 2 December 2016 LauraHarris wrote:
- Thank you very much for looking into this. We have decided we will put the information from the image into text form like you suggested.
- We didn't contact the authors to use their work.
- I have one more question, I have found an image on Flickr of Frank Sinatra Mug shot for when he was arrested for seduction in 1938, which is referenced on our seduction page. However, the licence for this image is C- all rights reserved. Just wondering if this means we can’t use it? -- LauraHarris
- @LauraHarris: it almost certainly does. A "Copyright, all rights reserved" notice is completely incompatible with the free licence that we need to be able to use an image on Wikipedia without problems. There exists a small chance that the copyright has actually expired (usually 70 years after the photographer's death), but it's very difficult to prove that in many cases. The only other chance is to make use of the "Fair use" doctrine to allow limited use just on Wikipedia. You would need to carefully read Wikipedia:Non-free content and ensure that all 10 policy criteria would be met. I actually think you would not be able to meet number 8: "Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 17:57, 2 December 2016 (UTC)