Talk:OTRS

Internal OTRS link.

See Wikipedia:OTRS for Wikimedia's email system.

What's the point of listing it in the talk page instead of the article? users trying to find WP:OTRS won't check the talk page. -- lucasbfr ^talk 08:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

It's as inappropriate as a CNN news article about payrolls containing "Call Marge in HR if you didn't get your paycheck.". -- Jeandré, 2011-08-14t10:43z

I don't understand what you see as a problem here. I assume you aren't trying to argue that the disambiguation link belongs here in the talk page, because the standard practice is to put such links in the article. If the basis of your objection is that you don't like the article itself, I believe the proper approach would be to allow the disambiguation link and then either try to get the article improved (to be less spammy?), or else nominate the article to be deleted or replaced by a redirect. But in any case, I believe the link does belong in the article (as long as the article does exist), because readers trying to find WP:OTRS need it. Richwales (talk · contribs) 14:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

OTRS is simply a software package and is not any way affiliated with Wikimedia. Though it is conceivable that users may end up at this article looking for Wikipedia's OTRS so a hatnote would not be inappropriate, however it must be placed using the {{selfref}} template. See Wikipedia:SELF#Avoid referring to "Wikipedia" for more info. -- œ^™ 16:17, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I've added the link back (see here), using {{selfref}}. Hopefully this will be seen as acceptable. Richwales (talk · contribs) 17:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

History of OTRS versions

A history section containing a table of versions going back to 2002, with dozens of lines like the sample data row below:

OTRS Versions

Version	Date	Comment
2.1.2	2006-10-18	Miscellaneous bug fixes.

No one would come to Wikipedia for this, and you couldn't possibly keep it up to date and in sync. This sort of thing is of interest only to someone deeply involved with the company, and not in an encyclopedia.

I'm deleting the table in this section, leaving only the first, introductory sentence, which is appropriate. If someone wants to expand on that sentence in English, that might be appropriate.

If you decide to restore this table, please justify your reasoning, and indicate your connection with the company, if any.
Mathglot (talk) 20:51, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Distributed under several software licenses?

I have been trying to determine if there is a difference between the software license for the "community edition" and the software license for the supported solutions.

Some software vendors distribute their "community edition" as free software but only provides support for a solution bought together with a service contract where the software may be distributed under a different software license.

Does anybody have a reference to a license agreement for any of the paid solutions? Jespertp (talk) 08:25, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Open Technology Real Services

I am not sure but I think OTRS has a different meaning now; Open Technology Real Services. https://www.otrs.com/trainings/otrs-certification-program-2/ —M@sssly^✉ 23:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes thats right. I renamed it in the wiki. --Joker01 (talk) 09:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Remove section "OTRS use in Wikipedia"

I attempted to remove this section but this was reverted. This section is trivia that is substantiated by a single blog source that almost certainly fails WP:RS. Wikimedia's own use of OTRS is not especially notable and there is little point in referencing it in this article unless we are going out of our way to try to be self-referential for some strange reason. Per WP:TRIVIA, WP:UNDUE, and WP:RS, I propose that this section should be removed. --Chris (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

• Object: Obvious I disagree with that. It is a significant implementation. If it is removed without this being better referenced there may need to be a need to return this to WP:AFD. There is significance in adoption by number of users. The lack of quality and referencing of the article overall is a bigger issue and other sections have far less DB:V. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk)
  • I have my doubts that there even are any third-party reliable sources that discuss Wikimedia's use of OTRS. If there aren't any, then the section definitely doesn't belong in the article. A blog by a Wikimedia OTRS sysadmin isn't appropriate as a source that this is a "significant" or noteworthy implementation. --Chris (talk) 20:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Account Block

Please how can I get help to unblock my account. I unknowingly posted advertising contents , in a way to contribute to wikipedia. I did that , out of innocency. Thanks JeshuaG (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

@JeshuaG: Please read this. Wikipedia:Appealing a block. Or goto WP:TEAHOUSE, as per the welcome I've put on your help page. But don't continue to post here or on an article talk page. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 13:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia moving from OTRS

This relates to the desupport of the community version. Wikimedia seems to be in a process of migrating from it per [1]. Noting this here but have not tried to dig further currently. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark (talk) 18:54, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Technical notes - email configuration

This paragraph about email setup in the "Technical notes" section seems like an inappropriately-excessive amount of bafflegab:

In UNIX and UNIX-like environments OTRS can make use of system programs such as the mail transfer agent Postfix to provide email functionality but this should only be considered in limited circumstances in which the possible pitfalls are clearly understood and deemed inconsequential such as cases where there exists limited or no internal corporate email infrastructure. If possible it is always advisable to integrate OTRS with an enterprise's existing email architecture which requires close coordination and planning with the responsible IT representatives. If for some reason implementation constraints make this impossible, you must at the very least request action taken by your organization's DNS provider to configure a DNS 'A' record for the target host which validates the host as an authoritative domain server. A less desirable option, (and more likely to cause issues) would be configuring a DMARC record that allows an exception in normal conformance standards for emails sent from your server, but any far-end (receiving) email server may still bounce the incoming traffic depending on the server configuration.

IMO, that text could maybe fit in a user manual to open a chapter about email configuration, but it doesn't really belong in an encyclopedic overview of the product. At the very least, it would need some grammar clean-up and elimination of non-encyclopedic tone ("you must request action", "your organization", etc.). That whole paragraph could basically be rewritten as:

OTRS is a thing that sends email, so general considerations that apply to things that send email apply to it.

I'm just going to be bold and delete the paragraph. --173.252.44.52 (talk) 00:12, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Live Information.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:21, 5 May 2022 (UTC)