Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/September 2006/Doc Halloween

Wikipedian filing request:



Other Wikipedians this pertains to:



Wikipedia pages this pertains to:



Questions:
Have you read the AMA FAQ?
 * Answer: Yes

'''How would you describe the nature of this dispute? (policy violation, content dispute, personal attack, other)'''
 * Answer: article deleted

'''What methods of Dispute Resolution have you tried so far? If you can, please provide wikilinks so that the Advocate looking over this case can see what you have done.'''
 * Answer: here is the addy of where the article used to be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythic:_Role_Playing

read the Wiki Tutorials, contacted Geni

Summary:
I had an article about a book "Mythic Role Playing" by Tom Pigeon mythic@wordpr.com I gave the Wiki addy to him. He looked the article over and liked what I did. He said he was going to add a few things. On that page was a summary of the book, my nutural point of view, some links, a pic, and some info about the author, publisher, copyright, genres, etc. I put a copyright infromation about the pic in the pics summary page. This article was no different than others and I based mine off the "Savage Worlds" Wiki article as a template. Everyone was happy until the user Geni came along and deleted it. How he or she did that is beyond me because all I can do is edit. I contacted this Geni and all I was given was some legal mobo-jumbo. I thought Wiki wanted nutural articles. I provided as much information as I could to make Tom Pigeon happy about any copyright information (by the way he was delighted I took the hours to do this for him). Can you get me to the point of having my page undeleted?

Here is Geni's responses to my upset (angry and not off the wall) questions: here is his or her responses "It appeared to be a copyvio. It also appeared to lack a claim to notibilty.Geni 19:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

If you can provide evidence that the text can be used under the GFDL it can be undeleted (although it may get re delted due to lack of noteabilty and stuff. The image was lisenced under a no comercial use lisence which means it cannot be used on wikipedia.Geni 22:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

GFDL is GNU Free Documentation License roughly translated into english it says that anyone can use your work for anything (including selling it for a profit) as long as they keep it under the GFDL.Geni 22:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)"

You might want to take a look at Geni's talk page. There are a lot of upset people this guy or gal has done wrong.

What do you expect to get from Advocacy?
 * Answer: my article undeleted, laymans understanding of what the problem is and how to fix it (not some links to pages that only a lawyer can understand)

Discussion:
This advocacy is done.


 * Working with Doc Halloween on his/her talk page (see here), I helped Doc take a look at the copyright and notability issues that were giving trouble to the deleted Mythic: Role Playing page and image.
 * Doc agreed that he/she doesn't have reliable evidence of notability at this time, and we got the deleted page restored to Doc's talk space for his/her use off-wiki. Doc's last comment was that he/she would have liked a more detailed explanation in the first case from the deleting admin, which was a tricky issue, but I passed it along to the admin for consideration.

TheronJ 14:45, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Followup:
When the case is finished, please take a minute to fill out the following survey:

Did you find the Advocacy process useful?
 * Answer: Very useful.

Did your Advocate handle your case in an appropriate manner?
 * Answer:Oh yes. TheronJ was very infromative, helpful, and explained things in a way that I could understand. He got me going in the right direction.

On a scale of 1 (worst) to 5 (best), how polite was your Advocate?
 * Answer: 5

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel your Advocate was in solving the problem?
 * Answer: 5

On a scale of 1 to 5, how effective do you feel the Advocacy process is altogether?
 * Answer: 5

If there were one thing that you would like to see different in the Advocacy process, what would it be?
 * Answer: All parties involved SHOULD be included in the discussions.

If you were to deal with this dispute again, what would you do differently, if anything? Doc Halloween 02:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Answer: Research more about the workings of Wikipedia.

AMA Information
Case Status: closed

Advocate Status:
 * I've taken this one. TheronJ 16:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)