Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 August 11

= August 11 =

An image license template and "all rights reserved"
I think there may be a problem with the following template: It says all rights reserved, but then it goes on to list a set of conditions to which the image may be modified, etc. The "all rights reserved" part makes me think that this license is for non-free images. The "Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted" part makes me think this license is for free images. Should the template be reworded? Is this template for free or non-free images? Is this license usable on Wikipedia the way it is worded now? I was going post this on the template's talk page, but compared to other image licenses, this one doesn't get used all that much so I figured not many people would have that page watchlisted.--Rockfang (talk) 00:28, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Copyright law grants certain rights to the copyright holder. The phrase "All rights reserved" means that the copyright holder is explicitly not relinquishing any of those rights. One of those rights is the right to control the use of the material, including grant of permission to copy under specified conditions. Such a grant is generally in the form of a contract or a license. In this case, the copyright holder chooses to license the right under certain conditions. If you violate the conditions, then you are in violation of the copyright holder's rights: you have no right except those granted via the license (and a few such as fair use granted directly by copyright law,) because the copyright holder reserves all rights. You have no "right" to use the material: you only have permission to use the material. -Arch dude (talk) 00:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replying. I read what you typed, but I'm not sure it answered any of my questions. :)  If you did, I apologise.--Rockfang (talk) 01:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The template says that the user is keeping HIS rights while at the same time granting OTHERS rights as well. This opposed to a situation where he might be relinquishing (some of) his rights. —Th e DJ (talk • contribs) 16:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry I was so obscure. I'll try again. The original author is keeping all the rights granted to him by law. You have no rights, but you do have permissions (not rights) that he (not the law) gives you via this license if you adhere to the terms of the license. -Arch dude (talk) 22:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I just uploaded a photo to add to a director's artcle, need help!!!
Being a newbie to all this, I appreciate any help I can get. I just uploaded a photo (one which I took) of Jay Jennings (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jay_Jennings-Writer-Director-Producer-Musician-Author.jpg#file) and I entered (to my knowledge) all the necessary info. I just don't know what to do next. Can someone look over the page and help me organize it so the photo and the summary I added is placed in that box on the upper right side of the article (like it is on other articles)? Much appreciated. Timemachine1967 (talk) 00:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have added an infobox with the image. There are many categories of information that can be added to the infobox. First, you can visit the template page to see all parameters supported by it at Infobox actor, and you can visit some famous film directors' pages to see various ways the particular infobox has been used in practice.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Timemachine1967 (talk) 01:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Editing problems when logged in
I can't edit any pages when I'm logged on with my user account. As far as I know, I haven't been blocked, banned, or anything of the sort.

When I try to edit a page in my user account, I see the expected URL, but no editing screen.

Information you might be interested in:
 * My user account: Dale Arnett
 * Browser/OS: I've had this problem with both Firefox 3.5 and Safari 4.0.2 for Mac OS X 10.4.11.
 * Skin: Classic

Is there something I should be doing? — 74.241.14.110 (talk) 00:46, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I've experienced this thing too. When clicking the "edit" command while using the "classic" skin, the page goes blank. I had to change to another skin to be able to write this comment. Antique Rose &mdash; Drop me a line  01:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like it's a skin issue. I'm using a different skin to write this. — Dale Arnett (talk) 01:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Others have reported this bug at Village pump (technical)/Archive 63. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

how do a searching for one particular word in the text ( not entry title)?
let's say i want to search for any time "archery" is listed within the pages of this beast called wikipedia.

when i search "archery" now, all i get is when it appears in the title ( i believe -- at least the first few hundred hits so far it has...). while interesting, that's not cutting it.

i'm more interested when the word "archery" appears within the article, as in a mention in Background sub-header...

and on that note, is there a way to search ALL of wiki Background sections ONLY for a term?

i have tried to read the advanced searching ptions, but it just ain't clicking with me. my apologies.

whoever answers this question correctly, will earn a temporary hallowed shrine to be built in their honor in my office.

thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.70.95.162 (talk) 01:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Both title and body of articles are searched by default. Search results with a matching title are usually displayed first.  can be used to only search titles. It gives me 137 hits. I don't know a method to only search body and exclude articles with a matching title. See more at Searching. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How about using Google? "archery site:en.wikipedia.org" brings back both title and body results. Xenon54 (talk) 01:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * (e/c) As long as you want your search to be restricted to articles, Google is a robust search engine for searching Wikipedia. I haven't kept up with improvements to tour internal search engine but Google used to be orders of magnitude better than Wikipedia's own search engine. Much of the functionality of Google has gone away since we instituted noindexing of everything but the article main space but I digress. For your search you can search Google using the operators   The first section restricts the search to only this site; the second says "don't return pages with the word archery in the title" and the third tells it to search for the word archery. Here's a link to that search.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Also of note: Special:WhatLinksHere/Archery lists all pages which link to the page Archery. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 01:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I NEED HELP MAKING A LINK ON A WIKIPEDIA PAGE TO A WIKISOURCE PAGE
Hello, The Baron Von Steuben wikipedia page needs an icon that tells readers he has writings on wikisource. If an editor could create that icon and link to his author page on wikisource, it would really be appreciated.

thanks, a reader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.172.142 (talk) 01:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * could be added to Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben but the only writing I can see at wikisource:Author:Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben is Revolutionary War Drill Manual and that already has a wikisource link at Revolutionary War Drill Manual and Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Free use?
US government photos are free use. How about this? http://www.azcorrections.gov/inmate_datasearch/results.aspx?InmateNumber=207346&LastName=SCHWARTZ&FNMI=B&SearchType=SearchInet This is from the Arizona state government.

Is this free use? I do not want to steal photos. Acme Plumbing (talk) 04:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You are correct in that US government photos are public domain (free to use). However, the law concerning that, 17 U.S.C 105, only applies to works made by the federal government. If you scroll down to the bottom of the page you linked to, the Arizona Department of Corrections claims copyright, so no, it isn't free or public domain. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 04:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

login/editing problem
I am having a problem editing and logging out. When logged in, all the links work except the "log out" link at the top right, which isn't clickable. I can click on all "edit" links, but the page doesn't load -- I just get a blank page. I have tried reinstalling my browser, clearing my cache/cookies and everything else (which is how I logged out), using Firefox in safe mode, and using a different browser, all to no avail. I'm not blocked, and I'm not getting a block message. Any ideas? Posted by User:Exploding Boy (not logged in) at 05:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Update: After getting some help clearing something out of my monobook, I'm able to edit again. However, the log out link at top right still isn't clickable, and Wikipedia pages are taking a long time to load.  Exploding Boy (talk) 06:13, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Have a look at the post above Editing problems when loggedin - try changing your theme. Tiggerjay (talk) 06:49, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Template class page
Template talk:Accipitriformes: I have written in "class=Template" which works in some WikiProject template banners, but not this one. Can it be fixed? I think it should add bird related templates to Category:Template-Class bird articles, a sub-cat of Category:Template-Class articles and Category:Bird articles by quality. Snowman (talk) 08:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have added the full quality scale as given in Template:WPBannerMeta (which is used in Template:BirdTalk. It will automatically classify Templates, Categories, Portals etc as such. You will have to create the categories; just follow the link in a banner and do it. ≈ Chamal  talk ¤ 11:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Presumably it will only automatically classify pates as templates if class=Template is used in the banner? Snowman (talk) 12:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

bot to convert jpgs to pngs?
Is there a bot in place that will convert jpgs to pngs? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 09:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * was approved for this. --59.95.99.183 (talk) 09:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The user running it is away from Wikipedia for an extended period, what is my next option? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 04:56, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A good conversion from JPEG to PNG is an activity that presently requires human intervention, since corruption by JPEG artifacts is not a reversible process. Tag it with BadJPEG and wait for someone to take a look at it. Dcoetzee 05:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

New Stussy article
I was searching for Stussy stuff online. I can't seem to find an article regarding the brand. I think it meets the criteria laid out in WP:CORP but I wanted to see if a) I was searching for it incorrectly b)If it had ben created and deleted Also, I think I have seen a noticeboard to request new articles. Can anyone point me in that direction to get some input from other editors.Cptnono (talk) 10:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There is currently no article about Stussy on Wikipedia. See the logs for Stussy and Stüssy, which shows an article has been created and deleted before (under CSD A7). You can create the article again if it does qualify WP:CORP, but be sure to show this notability. Requesting new articles can be done at WP:RA (this should go under this), but it may take a very long time until it is created. ≈ Chamal  talk ¤ 11:15, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm assuming it does meet the requirments but haven't verified yet. The logs are exactly what I was looking for. I have created the article. Although I have been editing for some time, this was my first attempt at a brand new peice. If anyone notices any concerns bring it up on the talk page or edit accordingly. Thanks again for the links Chamal.   Cptnono (talk) 05:53, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Paragraph boxed and elongated
One of my new article Paragraphs is boxed and elongated. Why is this and how can it be corrected? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcipa (talk • contribs) 11:56, 11 August 2009 (UTC) If it looks like this Then don't start the line with a space. Use a colon for indentation. See Cheatsheet for more markup. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 12:00, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Log in
I am having trouble logging in. I am User:Buster7. I was (just a moment ago) working on an article I had created the other day. [Charles Felix Van Quickenborne]. Without noticing that I was not logged in, I made a few edits. Now, although I see the screen that tells me I am logged in, the moment I click on "watchlist (or any other), it goes back to the log-in screen. Thanks in advance.--75.2.246.229 (talk) 12:41, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Got in....:-).......--Buster7 (talk) 12:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If you arent using a public computer, make sure you click "Remember me for the next 30 days." That should keep you safe for a month at a time! Livewireo (talk) 13:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * See also Help:Logging in. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Creating a portal
How can I create a portal ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wild mine (talk • contribs) 14:01, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The guidelines are here: Portal/Instructions. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you !Wild mine (talk) 14:09, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I am curious as to what you want to create a portal for? I've seen people who have extensive experience of editing articles having problems creating a portal - so perhaps if you told us what portal you want to create, someone might be able to help a bit! --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm even more curious now... a "Google" Portal? How will that work? --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:21, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I smell an MfD around the corner...Aren't portals supposed to be for broad topics, like video games or radio? A portal based on a group of around ten articles (basically History of Google and Google) isn't going to work too well. Plus it appears the user doesn't really know what to do now they've done the first portal creation step (box portal skeleton). Xenon54 (talk) 14:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I would suggest you give my own essay on portal creation a glance to give you some hints, tips and advice as well. Nanonic (talk) 14:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Are US Department Of Justice Files Considered Citable Sources ?
Let me ask some important questions which unarguably are legitimate help desk questions, and I would assume probably are not questions which anyone has previously asked you about --

The overall premise of the questions:

It seems to me that a file created by the US Government and which is in a sense “published” because the Freedom of Information act allows its contents to be made available upon request.

My questions relating to US Government files :

(1) Is a file created by the US Government, at tax payer expense, if not declared secret, an authoritative source which can be cited in Wiki ? And if it can be cited then how do you cite it ?

(2) Is a file which has already been created and is available to be requested under the Freedom of Information Act, but must be actually be specifically requested in order to actually be released  -- is that considered published ?

(3) What if I definitively know what is in the file (because I contributed original content to it in the form of letters ) ? Can I not release such content without formally requesting the US Government to release it -- in other words, can I not release my own contributions to an authoritatively published source and then cite the source ?

My question relating to WIKI help desk use:

If I observe actual violations of US federal law (in this case Obstruction of Justice) when I find what appears to be agents planted by the US Department of Justice laying their fingers on the public global information footprint of people they have indicted and await trial (Governor Blagojevich for instance), shouldn’t I use the HELP DESK to bring this matter to the attention of WIKI ? How do you report such issues ?

For people from other countries who might work for the Wiki Help Desk, let me explain that once you indict someone for a federal crime in the USA then an entirely different set of laws comes into play. The US Justice Department, in the interest of fairness, has certain obligations -- they cannot interfere with the ability of Mr. Blagojevich’s lawyers to collect facts. Since we all know that Wiki’s articles and help desk are scanned by Google’s robots and their content becomes global, any redaction of information useful to his lawyers here by US Government personnel would constitute obstruction of justice. Anyone not employed by the US government could do so, but not these people because they have a special obligation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.103.28.57 (talk) 14:24, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, in order:
 * Question 1 - not all Government Files would be counted as reliable - it depends on who created the content (see 3 below)
 * Question 2 - I am not sure if something which might be available can be cited. Although you might say that your file is available under the FoIA, it might be that if I tried to get access to it, the request might be denied for reasons of security,etc. It is not the same as a newspaper article which is available with a subscription - we can verify that the article is available, even if we don't actually pay and access it. How can we verify that your file is available under the FoIA without paying for the request?
 * Question 3 - in general, self-published materials (which would include self-written letters) would not generally count as reliable documents. Whether they would count as such when quoted in a Government file is another issue, although as the file would show that they are written by you, rather than by what Wikipedia would count as an independent, reliable source of information, they may still not be counted as citeable. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:45, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In response to the second part of your query (the 'helpdesk' bit) - this is not the place to mention your suspicions. I would suggest either Administrator intervention against vandalism if you count it as vandalism or Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for other incidents. Make sure you have evidence of your allegations (times and dates etc). Whether it would make a difference if you were a registered user or not, I cannot say. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I do thank PhatomSteve for trying, but his response seems only slightly more useful than saying "I don't Know". He did at least define the issues involved, which I sincerely thank him for accomplishing.

You say that the Government source must be reliable. How the heck does one establish that ?

We all know that the US Department of Justice has historically had an unimpeachable reputation for honesty -- that is until George Bush came to power. Then it turned into a nest of vipers with its number 1 viper, Alberto Gonzales, former US Attorney General, kicked out for corruption. Obama is likely to restore its reputation, but the problem is that Republicans have completely blocked even commencing confirmation of all of his replacements for US Attorneys in the Senate -- this means we are left will all the same Republicans that ran local US Attorney offices around the country. Until they are kicked out and people like me rush in looking for vengence by exposing all the crap that went on under Bush, we are stuck with what we have. If this were any country other than the USA, I would expect a coup d'etat to stop all this crap from coming out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.103.28.57 (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's nonsense. Despise Bush though I may, the US DOJ has had many other long ugly periods, as anybody conversant with labor or civil rights history knows. Try the Palmer Raids, the term of AG Mitchell under Nixon, etc. The lies against ML King under the Hoover FBI are still being taken seriously by some editors here! -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * To answer your questions, Wikipedia can only really accept material published in secondary sources, not primary sources. Read our info on original research for more info. I'll refrain from any political commentary. TN X Man  17:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Government documents are not considered reliable just because they are government documents. For example, the government interviewed a lot of people who claimed to have been abducted by aliens.  Those transcripts are now government documents.  Using them to state that there is reliable evidence of alien abductions is simply idiotic.  What matters is the source of the data, not the repository.  Also, as mentioned, the help desk is for help with using Wikipedia, not for "helping" Wikipedia turn into a collection of unfounded conspiracy theories. --  k a i n a w &trade; 17:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Mr Grimm, if other editors see the actual content you want to add to Wikipedia then I think you will get a more clear answer. I have already given my answer at User talk:PrimeHunter. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:04, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Orange Mike, for an unexhaustive list of remarkably corrupt USDOJs under Republican Presidents.

And Tnxman307, isn't a file, by definition a secondary source since it merely collects information on a particular subject created by entities who may not even know each other ? Would an FBI file which comments on a USDOJ file then become a secondary source which can be cited ? -- Because believe me, I have one of those too -- For example, to support that assertion, last week I faxed the local FBI office, they know me well, and called them a bunch of retards from participating in a local Job Fair and then providing absolutely no security for a windowless concrete on slab room of 200 people carrying briefcases that had never been checked by anyone. I certainly hope someone got fired over there for that, because that is why I sent it.

And Kainaw, you miss the point here altogether, the issue at hand is not whether inclusion in a government file makes an assertion a fact, the reader would judge that matter -- the point is merely whether or not something in a government file which is available for public inspection under the freedom of information act -- is that yes or no, a citable source ? Someone, please definitively answer that. So far, other than establishing that a department of the US Government with access to 20 billion in funding, may not be reliable for political reasons, I am finding no evidence yet that it is not authoritative or that Government sources in general are not quotable in Wiki.

I am making a sincere effort to nail Wiki down on this issue so I can proceed to publish the entire contents of my USDOJ and FBI files here and then link them to related cases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.103.28.57 (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * No, they are not "published" in any meaningful sense. Also: Wikipedia is not your webhost; you cannot "publish the entire contents of my USDOJ and FBI files here"! That's not what we are for. Read our rules about original research. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  18:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if you are simply not reading the responses or simply refusing to accept any answer you don't want to hear. The answer is NO.  Being "published" (which you are redefining to mean "publicly available") does not make it a reliable resource.  Government documents are not necessarily a reliable resource.  Some government documents are reliable - such as the census reports.  Others are not.  I do not understand why that is hard to comprehend.  If you can explain why you don't understand it, we can attempt to help you understand.  If you are simply refusing to accept an answer you don't like then it is a problem that cannot be fixed because Wikipedia will never ever become your personal conspiracy theory post. --  k a i n a w &trade; 20:32, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * You do not understand the function of the help desk, nor do you understand the function of Wikipedia. Therefore, in an attempt to help you I will briefly describe these two functions. First, you cannot rely on the help desk to "pin down" Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia policy is arrived at via consensus among the active Wikipedia editors, and the consensus is documented in the various Wikipedia policy articles. There are roughtly 150,000 active Wikipedia editors. If you disagree with Wikipedia policies, or you are having difficulty understanding nuances of a particular Wikipedia policy, then you should engange with the interested editors on the talk pages of those particular pages. Wikipedia's various talk pages are monitored by self-selected volunteers, and different volunteers have different interest and inclinations. Those of us who hang out on the help desk (perhaps a hundred or so) do not represent Wikipedia as a whole, and there is no reason to think that we are interested or knowledgable about the subtle nuances of all of the policies, Furthermore, there is no particular reason to think that any of use care to debate or explain policies in depth. What we can do here at the help desk is to point you to the correct places at Wikipedia to get help about the policies. Those are also the places where you can try to develop a consensus to change the policies. So, in my capacity as a self-selected helpdesk volunteer, I urge you to to first read WP:V and WP:RS, and then engange the interested editors on their respective talk pages. Now, about the function of Wikipedia. We are not the place to publish your own theories, even if those theories are based on reliable sources Pleaes read WP:SYNTH and WP:NPOV. This is a basic tenet of Wikipedia. If you wish to publish original research on the web, Please find another venue. One possible venue is our sister site at Wikibooks. If you have governmant documents that you have received under the FOIA, you can publish those documents at our sister site at Wikisource. -Arch dude (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Some Template Related Query. Problem With "|"
Just see Template:Ubxdisplay/random. I want to improve it.


 * It currently works like this: It displays a random template but No Params Allowed.
 * I tried working it out as follows: In the sandbox, I typed the following: but it didn't work. Here, 1 was the template param and 1/1 was the template's first param's parameter. }} still, it didn't work.
 * Question: Is there a way possible??

--Srinivas (talk) 14:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Image
I would like to add a logo of Cambridge House to the Cambridge House (organisation) article. The image is not a trademark, and I have been given permission by the charity to add it to the page. However, I am not sure how to proceed without the image being immediately deleted.Any suggestions would be much appreciated.Nkannas (talk) 15:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Logos can usually be uploaded to, and used on En Wikipedia, with an appropriate non-free use rationale, see WP:LOGO. If you go to WP:Upload and click on the Organizations link in the Logo section, it will take you to an upload page where you can fill in the required fields - remember to select "Logo" from the drop down list in the Licensing field. – ukexpat (talk) 15:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

problem deleting a logo
I added an organisation's logo without realising that the image resolution was far too large.How can I delete it, or modify the existing etnry to include a much smaller resolution image?Thanks in advanceNkannas (talk) 16:31, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Upload a new version of the file. —SpaceFlight89 16:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there a page which lists which WikiProjects have the most articles?
I am looking for a list of the wikiprojects which currently have the most articles. A complete list of all projects would be great, if not a top-ten or so would suffice. thanks. Willy turner (talk) 17:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * There is WP:WikiProject Council/Directory for a list of WikiProjects, but I am not aware of any list that shows what you described. It would be very difficult to keep up-to-date. I think that your best bet would be seeing how many pages are in the categories of WikiProjects.  hmwith  t   21:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I replaced my article's one photo with a cleaner one, yet Wikipedia added 4 extras photo to the file history/jpg page (not what I did).
I replaced my original photo with a current, cleaned-up photo to the file history/jpg page. This is the only link that should've been added to the file history/jpg page: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/Jay_Jennings-Writer-Director-Producer-Musician-Author.jpg. This new (current) photo added just fine to the Jay Jennings article page too. Yet when I checked the file history/jpg page, Wikipedia inexplicably added the old photo and new photo to the file history/jpg section 4 times (as reverted) making the file history look ridiculous and cluttered with 4 meaningless reverts. I tried to remove the other 4 revert columns (which I did not add), but do not know how. Can someone with the proper authority please remove them? I did not add the 4 extra reverted photos, as they serve no purpose, plus cosmetically, it makes the file summary look amateurish, especially since I've worked very hard to make the article look very neat and up to Wikipedia's standards. Here are the links to the 4 extra photos.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/5/54/20090811195304%21Jay_Jennings-Writer-Director-Producer-Musician-Author.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/5/54/20090811194932%21Jay_Jennings-Writer-Director-Producer-Musician-Author.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/5/54/20090811194850%21Jay_Jennings-Writer-Director-Producer-Musician-Author.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/archive/5/54/20090811194804%21Jay_Jennings-Writer-Director-Producer-Musician-Author.jpg

Thank you.Timemachine1967 (talk) 20:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I deleted all versions of the image/page except the most recent per WP:CSD.  hmwith  t   21:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, you may have a conflict of interest & should read WP:COI.  hmwith  t   21:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I don't see a COI. I'm just a fan trying to start an article for one of my favorite directors. It seems I've earned the wrath a bunch of newbie-hating editors, which I thought was against Wikipedia guidelines. Timemachine1967 (talk) 00:30, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

SUL account
Can anybody change my user name to User:Tjako? I want to start a SUL account. (See nl:Gebruiker:Tjako) that's me. 21:37 11 ago 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dutch T-bone (talk • contribs)
 * Please see WP:Changing username.  hmwith  t   21:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Rating Articles
How do you rate an article on its quality and importance scales? Dog poster  22:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It depends on whether the article is a part of a WikiProject or not. If it is, if you look at the Project's page, they will have the criteria for the assessment (or if not, you can ask on the project's talk page). If it is not part of a WikiProject already, find a suitable one to put it in (see WikiProject_Council/Directory) and then look at the relevant Project page(s). --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 23:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Someone elses writing.
I've had a copy of Shel Silverstein's work for some time and recently a friend asked me where they could find a copy. After finding out that the website i got it from is no longer active I started looking everywhere for it (with no luck). Since I have the only FULL six act copy that I know of, and it was posted all over the web in the past, is it OK to post it on Wikipedia without fear of a lawsuit?Shelfan (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * A couple of questions: firstly, what is the copyright date? Whether you can find a copy online or not, if it's still under copyright, then it's still under copyright - not being able to find it doesn't alter this; secondly, is your intention on placing the text of one of his full works on wikipedia? If so, that wouldn't be allowed - Wikipedia is not a repository for source material such as entire books. Complete copies of primary sources may go into Wikisource subject to that project's guidelines, but not on Wikipedia. --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 23:40, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Get it from a real, physical library: [//worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-45309 Works by or about Shel Silverstein] in libraries (WorldCat catalog) -Arch dude (talk) 01:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Taking text from annother website
is it alright to copy and paste movie synopsis from the movie studio? see User:Tim1357/sandbox/death on a factory farm--Tim1357 (talk) 23:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, as HBO quite clearly have © 2009 Home Box Office, Inc. All Rights Reserved at the bottom of the page, then no! --  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 23:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see wp:copy for more information on the wikipedia policy. Tiggerjay (talk) 05:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Almost equally relevant is that such a synopsis is bound to be full of studio spin and thus violative of our neutral point of view as well. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)