Wikipedia:VRT noticeboard

Welcome to the VRT noticeboard

Wikimedia's volunteer response team (VRT) handles copyright permissions, email inquiries from the public, reuse inquiries, article errors, and a wide range of non-public inquiries. The email service is operated and managed by a cross-project team of volunteers at the Meta-Wiki level and not by the English Wikipedia community. Actions by VRT members on English Wikipedia are ultimately subject to review by the Arbitration Committee. Please be aware that there is sometimes a backlog in processing tickets sent to the permissions-en queue. This backlog is currently 0 days. This noticeboard is primarily for Permissions verification and inquiries for text and files (hosted on the English Wikipedia) said to have been granted permission via VRTS. Requests for VRT member review of matters that have been described as VRT comments or actions. Other inquiries to VRT members that do not involve, disclose or reference private material. Do not post Private information or links to private information (including but not limited to emails, phone numbers, physical addresses). Fishing requests (asking for all details of a ticket or generally probing ticket information). You should make a specific request and clearly state the reason for your request. Additional questions on a point, once a VRT member has indicated they cannot answer due to privacy issues. (Further inquiries and any complaints should be made via email.) Requests for VRTS access (use meta:VRT/Volunteering instead). Questions regarding media hosted on Wikimedia Commons (use Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard instead). Media questions unrelated to VRT (use Wikipedia:Media copyright questions instead). Disputes For disputes over VRT actions on English Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team § Dispute resolution and Wikipedia:Dispute resolution § Sensitive issues and functionary actions. Useful VRT email addresses Removal of private or defamatory information Requests for oversight or oversight-en-wpwikipedia.org Submission of photos to be used in a Wikipedia article photosubmissionwikimedia.org Follow the instructions here Confirmation of copyright permission permissions-enwikimedia.org Follow the format given here Reports of threatened harm to self or others emergencywikimedia.org Guidance: Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm Reports of child pornography legal-reportswikimedia.org See Wikimedia Legal Policies Issues with an article about you or your organization info-en-qwikimedia.org Guidance: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help Any other inquiries involving private information info-enwikimedia.org

Noticeboard archives

Idea: OTRS feedback board

Most of the messages received and processed in the English Wikipedia's OTRS queues are things that don't affect life on-wiki outside their own individual scope: errors that need fixing, "why was my article deleted?", complaints about perennial topics... but some of them are different. Some of them are thank you notes to "Wikipedia's editors", some are articulate complaints of systemic bias, and some are written as if we had, and published, letters to the editor.

Would anyone be interested in an "OTRS feedback" board, where OTRS agents would cherry pick interesting messages of interest to the project as a whole, remove identifying information, and post them for the community to see and discuss among ourselves? I've asked OTRS administrators if this would be acceptable, so they might put the kibosh on this from their end, but I think it appropriate to ask the community in parallel... is this something we'd like to see? Jclemens (talk) 04:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Not to comment on the merits, but would the legal/WMF policy issues across umpteen different jurisdictions not make this rather tricky to pull off? Skomorokh 04:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

It is a good idea, and I'm all for transparency. However, even with all the PII and surrounding information, I can't find the real value in this one. Correspondents email us with confidence that we will not repost those messages, most especially to discuss in a round table style. I don't object to OTRS agents taking suggestions and reposting it to the project, if they take responsibility for those suggestions. They way it is currently suggested as above, I don't feel is workable. Respectfully, Jon@talk:~$ 06:47, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

OTRS receives tons of messages. The ones suitable for posting to the community are perhaps 1% of the non-spam total. Some, like the thank you messages that you currently never see, are addressed to the editor(s) of Wikipedia, giving implied permission for public circulation. At the same time, there is not currently any method to get such feedback to Wikipedians. Previously, I'd just replied to thank you notes on behalf of the community, but that feels kind of cheesy and suboptimal. Last week, I stripped the headers and signature from one thank you note, and sent it to the Functionaries email list, which is mostly limited to the Arbs, Checkusers, and Oversighters. I received multiple, universally favorable responses to my initiative. That got me thinking about this. Then, earlier tonight, I ran across a ticket where a user complains that Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party movement don't mirror each other and wonders if that reflects systemic bias. On seeing that, I thought that it might be a good question to pass on to the community: it was an articulately worded criticism, one that I wasn't going to try and respond to since I don't have any familiarity with either article, but one that might be worth letting the community know about and consider. Privacy concerns are paramount... but these sorts of messages, once devoid of headers and signatures, are praise or constructive feedback that I think would benefit the community.... but can't release due to the lack of a proper venue, safeguards, etc. Jclemens (talk) 07:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I support this if and only if the person sending the email clearly gives consent for the message to be posted and indicates that the person fully understands what information about them is and is not posted. Like any thing else on Wikipedia, the text of the message must be released under a CC-BY-SA-3.0 compatible license. MorganKevinJ^(talk) 19:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I could always make a reply template that says "Thanks for your message. May we anonymize it and publish it to Wikipedia under a free license so the rest of the community can see it?" or something similar... Adds a step, but definitely removes all doubt about permission to post on-wiki. Jclemens (talk) 04:30, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Possible mis-information

I own a coin that is NEARLY identical to what you describe as a King George VI's penny (1937–1952). There is a left-facing bust of a man (I assume it is the king, with the inscription GEORGIVS VI D: G: BR: OMN: REX: F: D: IND: IMP. The reverse shows an Old Sailed Ship sitting in water - over the top of the Ship is HALF PENNY and under the Ship is the date 1937. Since your article only mentions a coin that has the words ONE PENNY - do you think this is a DIFFERENT coin, or is this a mistake?? I was not able to find anything on Wiki about the 1/2 Penny so far. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.143.156 (talk) 03:27, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Permission to use materials of the website: sexology1.narod.ru

Wrong venue for attempting to grant permission.

Hello. Copyright holder of the HTML edition of the scientific work of the world famous sexologists: Masters,Johnson, Colodny. The textbook: "Human Sexuality". Russian version of this work (official version) is the base for the creation of this HTML edition: HUMAN SEXUALITY OF MASTERS, JOHNSON, COLODNY IN HTML. This is the compilation, which consists of the selected best chapters. The HTML edition is multi-language. Also, this version uses the xxx video materials in some chapters, for the educational purposes only. Why? Such content was used in the scientific research for good of the science and education. Sexual scenes were filmed by Masters and Johnson. Many of the different private records were lost. They needs to be restored or replaced. Only the second option is available. About copyright: I am the one of the translaters of the book to Russian language (of the official version). The publishing house Mir now is in the disrepair. Not has of competence in every sense. Till this moment people from our group of the employees got task to create the HTML version of the textbook. Now is ready. As the one of the translaters, I act currently as the rights holder. Lawfully absolutely. By me were used the tools of the CC, to get such right in the best quality of all. About spam, if was this: one time was period, when the HTML edition not was under a control. Access to the studio of this website was opened to any person, when go preparatory work mostly. Because of such openess, possible, there were unpleasant incidents. This situation was in far past. These incidents not have of any relation to my person. I am respected man who has the full control in the relation of this website currently. I give the permission to use any materials of this educational resource for all projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. Thanks! P.S. Copy of this permission was sent to: permissions@wikimedia.org. - 2.94.190.140 (talk) 19:46, 1 December 2011 (UTC). Observation: I believe the IP address is attempting to grant access to a version of this and therefore still under the active copyright of the US. Hasteur (talk) 20:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC) You wrong. Russian translation has own copyright (was got from the original). 128.68.213.171 (talk) 22:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC) My jurists have found alternative ways, if it will be necessary. Soon I will give the information. - 128.68.199.187 (talk) 17:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC). Some changes appeared on the page of the legal information (additional permissions). If this is not enough, give me know, please, by any method. Including, via: sexology1@yandex.com. Thanks! - 128.68.199.186 (talk) 18:22, 3 December 2011 (UTC).

SpiderGraph

I believe permission has been given for File:Hpqscan0002_=_The_Real_Estate_SpiderGraph_-_A_Home-Buying_Decision-Making_Aid.jpg via ticket 2011120210001086

Can the file be restored?  Chzz  ►  05:24, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure that is the correct name? No file has been uploaded under that name as far as I can see. --Guerillero | My Talk 06:28, 3 December 2011 (UTC)