Help desk
< May 1	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 3 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

May 2

Inaccessible article

I'm trying to view the article Comparison of e-book readers. Every time I attempt to go to that article, my browser hangs and I have to end the process with the Task Master. This has been going on for 24 hours, both with and without an immediate reboot. So far as I can determine, I can access all other articles.

First, can someone click on the comparison link above and tell me if the trouble is in my system or is this a problem with Wikipedia and/or the article itself? If it is my system, can anyone possibly tell me what I'm doing wrong? I'm running IE 8.0.6001.18702 on Windows XP-HE 5.1, SP3. I have 784,384 KB of memory. Thanks a lot. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 00:15, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the first part of your query, I am able to load the page (Win7/Mozilla). I don't have much to offer on what the problem may be, but hopefully someone else will have a suggestion. Monty ₈₄₅ 00:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The excessively large tables employing a multitude of colors might be to blame, but that's just a guess because the page doesn't cause me problems on XP with the same version of IE8 with 2.16 GB of RAM (technically 4, but 2.16 is as much as XP can see). - Purplewowies (talk) 00:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It works for me in IE9, both with and without compatibility mode (browser). The article has unusually wide sortable tables. Perhaps this is a problem. Try to disable Javascript before visiting the page. This makes tables non-sortable. You can also try to clear your entire cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:47, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried it on another PC with Win7/IE9 and it worked. I'll try your suggestions on the original PC when I get the chance. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 00:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tags for outdated and self-published sources

Hi, Three questions please:

If a source is self-published is there a tag to add next to the source without deleting it?

And what about an outdated source from the 1920s? Is there an inline "outdated tag" just for that without marking the section outdated?

How about a small inline WP:OR tag just for a sentence?

Thanks. History2007 (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically,

- {{Self-published source}}, see Template:Self-published inline
- {{As of|1920}}, see Template:As of
- {{Or}} or {{Syn}}, see Template:Or

--RoyGoldsmith (talk) 01:16, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I got two working, but the As of just looks like text, not a "out of date" item. History2007 (talk) 01:55, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are also

- {{Out of date}}, see Template:Out of date
- {{Update}}, see Template:Update. --Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank, but those seem like section tags. Do they also work inline like those above? History2007 (talk) 13:37, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Location Error

I created this article called Teunis G. Bergen Elementary School, a school in New York. Then, when I was putting the geographic location using that GeoHack thingy, I put 40° 40′ 42.74″ N, 73° 57′ 58.88″ W. However, when I put it on the page and clicked the link to test it out, the location that it showed was 40° 40′ 42.74″ N, 73° 57′ 58.88″ E, having the original West at the end of the coordinates changed to an East. So then, I decided to just put 40° 40′ 42.74″ N, 73° 57′ 58.88″ E, and then when I clicked the link, it showed up as 40° 40′ 42.74″ N, 73° 57′ 58.88″ W, the correct place. Is there any way to fix this glitch and to have both show the proper coordinates? Thanks! Tboii99 ✉ 00:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and I forgot to mention it, but can you please reply on my talk page? Thanks! Tboii99 ✉ 00:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on your talk page. - Purplewowies (talk) 00:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

how do i edit my username from case sensitive

i wanna my username to be virusattacked233 but displayed as Virusattacked233 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virusattacked233 (talk • contribs) 01:30, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can't. I signed up using "purplewowies," but the first letter of my username is capitalized. You can make it lowercase in your signature through your preferences. Also, logging in using the lowercase letter will achieve the same result as the capital one. - Purplewowies (talk) 01:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:USERNAME ("Wikipedia usernames are case sensitive, and the first letter of every username is automatically capitalized."). For customizing your signature, see WP:SIG.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to visit - Changing Usernames. Good luck! Monterey Bay (talk) 05:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you add {{lowercase title}} at the top of your user page and user talk page then the user name will be displayed with a lowercase "v" at the top of those pages. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

International Autograph Auctions

I am trying to put a page onto the site, I have now been deleted 3 times and upon each occasion I have asked for some help as to why however the individual who has deleted me has not replied to any of my questions. Having used other pages as templates and followed your guidelines with specific reference to links and references I can not see a good reason why the contribution can't remain. Is there anyone who can help or are you guys just there to remove pages? Radavie (talk) 09:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Radavie. Is the article in question Ian Sayer? In which case, it may have been previously deleted because it lacks sources - there's a huge amount of information, but only one source is provided, and there are no inline citations at all. Wikipedia content has to be verifiable - everything stated in the article has to have been previouslt published in a reliable source. Without such sources, subjects are judged to be non-notable, and thus not eligible for an entry in Wikipedia. Adding sources to the article and citing them in the article text should ensure that it doesn't get deleted again; certianly he seems notable from the article content. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think he's talking about International Autograph Auctions. This was speedy deleted because it seemed to be blatant advertising, which isn't allowed on Wikipedia. Articles on businesses need to be for non-promotional purposes, which means they need to be worded neutrally and meet the notability standard, and usually, the article shouldn't be created by an owner or employee of the business. Do you think your article met these requirements? Equazcion ^(talk) 09:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Edit clash] It seems that the page was "International Autograph Auctions". (I've therefore retitled your question accordingly, from "Help".) I quote, pretty much at random:

International Autograph Auctions have established a well deserved reputation for the authentication of material,the quality of material, realistic estimates and consistently high levels of sales with most auctions achieving between 85% and 95% of lots sold.

That sounds like advertising blurb to me. You'd have to demonstrate the near-impossible: (i) that it has a reputation for all these things, and (ii) that the reputation is well-deserved. Each assertion would require one or more disinterested, reliable source, and the source(s) for the latter would have to be independent of that/those for the former. Better skip the "well-deserved": Has it established such a reputation? If so, let's see the source(s) for this claim. You can work on the article in your sandbox; when you think it's ready, ask other editors to take a look at it.

But are you perchance related to International Autograph Auctions? If so, better read "WP:COI" -- and whether or not you are related, better read "WP:V" and the pages to which it links. -- Hoary (talk) 09:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see that you put a lot of work into the article "Ian Sayer", which is highly laudatory but virtually unsourced, and which interestingly says He is currently a consultant to Europe’s leading specialist autograph auction house, International Autograph Auctions Ltd , the British based company he helped to establish, with autograph expert Richard Davie, in 2005. -- Hoary (talk) 09:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about your request for help. I found it, at Talk:International Autograph Auctions. It's interesting:

This page should not be speedily deleted because it is based exactly on other pages on the site such as Christies, Sothebys, Alexander Auctions and Kenneth Rendell. I have copied the format exactly from existing pages and simply can not understand how if this page is not permitted others are? I would love some help with regards to how I can phrase this so it is not an advertisement but no-one has been prepared to do this, could you possibly help me with regards to this as I am becoming increasingly frustrated? I understand that, if we are breaking a rule, we will be removed but when I have basically copied other pages and substituted words then this is unfair.

[My emphases.]

First, it's not just a matter of copying an existing format. (Indeed, it's not just a matter of copying an existing anything, as other stuff may be crap: see "Wikipedia:Other stuff exists".) You need to present material from/with a neutral point of view, and your assertions must be verifiable.

Secondly, I'm interested by your use of "we". Why do you say "we"? -- Hoary (talk) 10:06, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image available on Afrikaans wikipedia but not in English

File http://af.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%AAer:MTDBlint2.gif

Is available on the Afrikaans wikipedia but I cannot use the file in English - how do I go about getting it to share accross Wiki's?

Gbawden (talk) 09:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is public domain, you could try Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to page has not saved

We made a change to our Wiki page, and the changes have not retained....why is this?

Thanks Cisumegar (talk) 11:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit was reverted because it was promotional, which isn't allowed here. It also seemed to be copied from http://www.paulleonardmorgan.com/biog.html, which also isn't allowed. You say "we" made a change, who is "we"? Equazcion ^(talk) 11:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks.

"We" are the two people who work for Paul Leonard-Morgan. We want to be able to edit this page, being as un-bias as possible, so are you able to give us some guidelines?

Thanks

Cisumegar (talk) 11:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the advice is don't do it. Because you work for the subject of the article you stand in a conflict of interest. Our advice in such cases is invariably to leave it to uninvolved editors since it will be nearly impossible for you to write with neutral point of view which is one of our core content policies|. Your edit to the article was saved, but it was reverted by another editor a couple of days later. Please read the information on copyright on your talk page. I strongly suggest that you do not edit the article directly yourself, but restrict yourself to making suggestions on the article talk page and leave it to others to decide whether and how to include them.

I also note that your post suggests that two people are editing from the same account. This is strictly against Wikipeida rules, see WP:NOSHARE. All edits must be attributable to an individual person for licencing reasons. Spinning Spark 12:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the two latest posts from Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questions#Edit to page has not saved to keep the discussion in one place. Click the "edit" link to the right of the section heading to add to the existing discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks,

Can you tell me how to make said 'suggestions' on the article?

Cisumegar (talk) 12:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You start a new discussion at Talk:Paul Leonard-Morgan. Spinning Spark 13:19, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What he said ^. Just edit in a comment there, as you did here. It would be a good idea to put {{Request edit}} above your comment, which will attract editors who can review the request (since that article doesn't have many people watching it right now). Equazcion ^(talk) 13:22, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As so.....?

((Request Edit))

Paul Leonard-Morgan is a BAFTA-winning and Ivor Novello-nominated British composer, producer and artist known for composing for television and film (Limitless, Dredd, Spooks).

He was nominated for a World Soundtrack Discovery Award 2011 for his soundtrack to Limitless.

He won a BAFTA for his first film soundtrack, Pineapple. He scored the ITV drama Fallen, which was nominated for a BAFTA as well as an Ivor Novello award. Leonard-Morgan composed series 5-10 of the BBC spy drama Spooks (MI5 in US). He was nominated for a BAFTA for the score to series 7. He scored the 2011 film Limitless, starring Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro. The film was directed by Neil Burger and was the Box Office No 1 in both the UK and US, taking in more than $160 million worldwide.

Leonard-Morgan completed the soundtrack for the upcoming film ‘Dredd’, directed by Peter Travis (Vantage Point) from a script by Alex Garland (The Beach, 28 Days Later, Sunshine), and starring Karl Urban and Olivia Thirlby. Dredd is due for worldwide release in September 2012.

He graduated from the Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama.

Leonard-Morgan has worked with artists including Snow Patrol, Belle and Sebastian, Craig Armstrong, Texas, Nada Surf, The Young Knives, Mogwai and Joy Zipper.

Leonard-Morgan has collaborated with ex-Belle and Sebastian cellist and singer Isobel Campbell on all her albums, including her Mercury Prize nominated album Ballad Of The Broken Seas, on which she collaborated with Mark Lanegan (Screaming Trees). Most recently Paul worked with Mogwai on their latest album “Hardcore Will Never Die But You Will”.

In 2005, Leonard-Morgan was commissioned to compose the music for the official launch ceremony of The Freedom Towers, the designs that will replace the Twin Towers at Ground Zero.

In 2007, Leonard-Morgan was selected by the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) to compose a new US Olympic anthem, previously scored by composer John Williams. The anthem was launched at the US Olympic headquarters in Colorado Springs on September 11, 2007, with Leonard-Morgan performing it live at the Colorado Springs Concert Hall.

His album, Filmtales, was released in 2008 to critical acclaim and features collaborations with Isobel Campbell, Richard Colburn (Belle and Sebastian), Steve Mason (Beta Band), Esther O’Connor and Jenna Gibbons (Shapeshifters). It also features the US Olympic Anthem, Glory of Pursuit.

Cisumegar (talk) 14:53, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As stated above, you need to make the suggestion at Talk:Paul Leonard-Morgan. Furthermore, you will need to support the suggestion with references to independent reliable sources. Finally there is a difference between {{Request edit}} and ((Request Edit)). The shape of the brackets is significant in Wikipedia syntax. David Biddulph (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 30 page view data disappeared

I have never noticed page view data disappear. April 30 page view data was available until early on May 2. Then it disappeared. What happened?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 11:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect information on Drakenstein Municipality page

Dear Sir/ Madam

On the Drakenstein Local Municipality, Paarl, under the Western Cape Government, page is incorrect information regarding the Executive Mayor.

The current Executive Mayor is Adv Gesie van Deventer and NOT Charmaine Manuel.

Can you please correct it or advise me on how it can be corrected.

Regards

May Carolissen Chief Media and Communication Drakenstein Municipality [phone numbers redacted] May Carolissen (talk) 12:39, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox name in Drakenstein Local Municipality is taken from Template:Metadata South Africa/muni/mayor. I have updated it. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you remove Forward "a generic term for socialist movements"

I want to to know why you altered/deleted the "generic socialist link" of Forward on your site?

It was up there yesterday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.184.67 (talk) 14:28, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can check the history tab for the article Forward to see what edits have been made, by whom, and what edit summaries were provided. I'm not sure those will answer your question in a useful manner as there seems to be some edit warring, at least one AFD (discussion at Articles For Deletion), and enough acrimony that it makes me want to get a ten foot pole and stand twenty feet back. I'm sorry I can't be of more assistance. RJFJR (talk) 16:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Info Box

How do I change an info box from "politician" to "philanthropist"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanWalter (talk • contribs) 16:03, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What article are you looking at? RJFJR (talk) 16:11, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no infobox specifically for philanthropists. You should use the generic {{Infobox person}}.--ukexpat (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

However, if this individual is in fact best known as a politician, this might be a serious mistake. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From response on the OP's talkpage the article is Harry Lonsdale, which uses the infobox politician template but lists occupation as businessman. (It's gone through quite a number of edits in the last two days.) RJFJR (talk) 14:28, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

{{infobox businessman}} was just a redirect to the generic {{infobox person}}, but is now deleted altogether. He ran for senate three times so {{infobox politician}} is probably appropriate in any case. Spinning Spark 15:16, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JANKO KONSTANTINOV ARCHITECT

HI THERE. IN APRIL 2010 SOMEONE PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE ABOUT MY HUSBAND JANKO KONSTANTINOV.

IT IS LOADED WITH PROFANITY AND OBVIOUSLY AN UNEDUCATED TWIT WROTE IT.

I AM GOING TO SUE.....TODAY I AM PICKING UP THE PHONE TO MY LAWYER.

MY HUSBAND IS A WORLD FAMOUS ARCHITECT AND HAS DONE A LOT FOR THE WORLD. HE DOES NOT DESERVE THIS KIND OF REPRESENTATION

MARGARET KONSTANTINOV...... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.63.35.67 (talk) 17:36, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Janko Konstantinov first appeared on WP in July of 2010. It remains a stub, but I can find nothing in it that should be objectionable, and certainly nothing with profanity in it. What am I missing? Bielle (talk) 17:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the encyclopedia Wikipedia. Are you referring to some other website or publication? See Wikipedia:No legal threats. If you wish to discuss a Wikipedia article here or on other Wikipedia pages then you must retract your legal threat. Otherwise the linked page says what you can do. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The mk Macedonian article was also created in July 2010, and the sr Serbian just last Sunday, April 29th. The mk article doesn't appear to have been vandalised, and the sr is its original. Dru of Id (talk) 19:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe she means http://lohere.net/kulkapedia/samuel/Janko_Konstantinov . It is such a mess (automating obscenity adding(?)) that I don't know whether it violates the rules for copying Wikipedia content or not.Naraht (talk) 20:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good guess. The profanity at the site has nothing to do with Wikipedia. The site has a false "CONTACT US" link which leads to Wikipedia but we are not responsible for that site. I don't know how you can contact them. They also make a false claim to be a Wikimedia project by displaying http://bits.wikimedia.org/images/wikimedia-button.png. It can damage the reputation of the Wikimedia Foundation and I will contact Wikimedia's General Counsel. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My picture question

Hello, I have recently received a warning on my talk page for adding a possibly copyrighted image. I am keen not to be doing this, but I fear I am misunderstanding how to find pictures on Flickr which are fair use? That image: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ambertq/2956069887/sizes/l/in/photostream/ claims to be creative commons licenced - is this not ok for use on Wikipedia? Please let me know as I am keen to have a picture of April the Tapir on the article, and I don't want to infringe copyright or get any more warnings if possible! Thanks! Anthony J Pintglass (talk) 17:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Anthony,

If you look at the below flickr image info box, you will see that it is unfortunately not allowed to upload a picture licensed with CC-BY-ND in Commons. --GoP _T ^C _N 17:54, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr image info.	License	OK here?
© All rights reserved	Copyrighted	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-NC-ND	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-NC-SA	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-NC	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-ND	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY	OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-SA	OK
No rights reserved.	Public Domain	OK

Just to add, the ND means No Derivative, which is not an uncommon (so to speak) license, but is not compatible with Wikipedia, as our goal is to have material than can be re-used.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 18:00, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To follow-up, because that image was a nice one, I have had success, on occasion, talking to the photographer and getting them to change the rights. If you let them know it is for Wikipedia, and their name will show up on the image page, they might be willing to make the change. That particular image is available in multiple sizes, so they might be willing to change the license for one of them to a conforming license. --SPhilbrick (Talk) 18:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Help

It seems helpdesk questions are brief so I will keep mine brief as well. I'm wading into new territory for me, as I've never made an RfC before, and I want to make an RfC, but first I'd like to work with an Admin 1-on-1 to a) get their feedback on whether an RfC is appropriate, b)framing it succinctly which I am having trouble doing, and c)if kosher, talk with me about my specific concerns before posting it. It's about Wikipedia policy, touching on a lot of different issues: WP:AfD, WP:EVENT, WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, WP:MMANOT, and has devolved into a complicated mess, with a lot of players but without inappropriate user conduct (for the most part). There seems to be no online admins with a "dispute" checkmark at WP:HAU except for one who is slightly involved. Can someone drop me a line on my talk page? Apologies if I am not using the help desk correctly. Mreleganza (talk) 18:09, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have offered assistance on the user's talk page. Spinning Spark 18:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Questions About Article and Photographs

To: Help Desk,

I am a digital artist and have a several questions about the copyright on the Dorothea Lange page and her photographs that were published in Wikipedia. Let me give you the information first about my problem that my questions will be based on.

Two years ago in March during Historical Month for Women, I wrote a post with photographs, using Wikipedia as my resource( here is the link that I used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothea_Lange ) and published it on my blog about Dorothea Lange. I wrote it in my own words as to not plagerize the author who wrote the article in Wikipedia or to plagerize the works of Wikipedia that are published concerning the photographs of Dorothea Lange. At the bottom of the post, I added two links from Wikipedia to give Wikipedia the credit for where the article was found, where I got my information, and also where the photographs where found that I placed in the post.

Here is the link to the post that I published on--1artgirl (talk) 19:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC) my blog site about Dorothea Lange: http://freetrinketstreasures.blogspot.com/2010/03/march-is-womens-history-month_25.html[reply]

Here are the links I put at the end of the Dorothea Lange post to give Wikipedia the proper credit concerning the article information and where the photographs were located:

article: http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Dorothea_Lange pictures: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Dorothea_Lange

I posted this two years ago and since then I have become a member of Digital Whisper.ning and our group will be publishing our first edion of the Digital Whisper magazine at the end of this month. When the administrators of our group sent out a call for art work to be submitted for publication, I sent four digital art pieces to them that I created from 9 of the photographs from the Dorothea Lange post that I published in March 2010 (link above).

When I sent the art work to them, I had to get the links of the 9 photgragh to also send to them so that they can credit Wikipedia as to where I got the photographs to create my art work as well as to identify that the material I used to create the art is in public domain and copyright free. When I looked up the links to the photographs, I discovered that the page had been modified and that over 2,300 pictures that didn't exist when I published the post, exist now and with more inforamtion about copyright concerning ownership of the photographs. The photographs that I used for the art work had the Creative Commons logo and are also established by the Library of Congress as being in public domain.

As I understand this---freely licensed media is within public domain and can be used for personal use, right? As I understand your policies concerning copyright, I read that photographs established in the Creative Commons files and also from the Library of Congress are in Public Domain and are for personal use. Am I right about this? So by these two definitions of the Creative Commons and Lbrary of Congress, the photographs that I used were okay to alter in digital form and can be sent for possible publication? Or by personal use, does this mean tht I can use the photgraphs for personal use but as far as sending them for submission to be published would change the personal use into a different catagory of commercial use and gain and therefore prohibited by the copyright laws of Wikipedia even thought they have the Creative Commons and the Library of Congress logos and both say they are in pubic domain? In other words, can photographs used from public domain sources be used for commercial gain without harming the copyright laws of Wikipedia?

And what about the photographs that are filed under the links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._National_Archives_and_Records_Administration and http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/fsa1998018448/PP/ under the U. S. Farm Security Administration? Are the photographs also in pulic domain and also copyright free and therefore available on Wikipedia as for personal use and or commercial use, as in my case using photographs to create art work to be pulished in a art magazine?

My second problem with the photographs I used for my art work from Dorothea Lange is about what I mentioned in the above paragraph about the material being updated a year after I wrote the post. Two new links was posted to some of the photograghs,(1)owner of the Dorothea Lange slide ngatives: U.S. Farm Security Administrations, (2) U. S. National Archives and Records Administation. I read that most of the images from both of these government places are classified as in public domain and for personal use but proper credit must be given to the NARA and the FSA.

So have I understood these policies correctly? Also what kind of personal use are they referring to in their description of public domain ad non-restrictions of images? Does this mean that even if they are catagorized as files coming from the NARa or the FAS as long as they are in the Commons Creative files they are in pubic domain and are copyright free and therefore to be used in personal use or as in my case to be published in digital altered art form in a art magazine?

Can you look at the public use information identified in the description of the 9 photographs that I used for my art work and let me know If I have yoru permission to use them in digital art and for publication? The Digital Whisper administrators want to publish my work but they are in question of the copyright of the photographs that I have usd. Can we get a clear, cut answer from you that it the 9 photographs I used are in public domain and cpoyright free and can be used for personal use or commercial gain to be published in the Digital Whisper Magazizne? Of course, proper credit would be given from where each photgraph came from and links probvided for any information used from Wikipdeia. They also want to publish the post I wrote along with the pictures that I posted with the article concerning Dorothea Lange. Will you look at the post and tell me if this can also be published in the Digital Whisper magazine with credits going to Wikipedia as well as proper credits to the photgraphs used?

Here are the links for the nine photographs that I used for my art work:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lange_car.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_Arizona_Highway_87,_south_of_Chandler,_Arizona._Grandmother_and_sick_baby_of_migratory_family_ca_._._._-_NARA_-_522206.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_Arizona_Highway_87,_south_of_Chandler._Maricopa_County,_Arizona._Children_in_a_democracy._A_migra_._._._-_NARA_-_522204.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_Arizona_Highway_87,_south_of_Chandler._Maricopa_County,_Arizona._Children_in_a_democracy._A_migra_._._._-_NARA_-_522529.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Near_Coolidge,_Maricopa_County,_Arizona._Young_girl_works_in_cotton_field_on_Saturday_morning._Her_f_._._._-_NARA_-_522537.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3a/On_Highway_84%2C_Pinal_County%2C_Arizona._Ranch_advertisement_during_cotton_harvest_in_Eloy_District._-_NARA_-_522218.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oliverhurst,_Yuba_County,_California._Another_of_the_26_homes_on_Second_Avenue._Family_with_three_ch_._._._-_NARA_-_521581.jpg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MigrantMotherColorized.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Migrant_agricultural_worker%27s_family%2C_Nipomo%2C_California_ppmsca03054u.jpg

Thank you for taking your time to read this and please let me know what your policies concerning this type of problem and if the copyright will be violated if the material above is published. Kym Decker--1artgirl (talk) 19:56, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will answer the Dorothea Lange part of your request first and then take a look at your other requests later,

All nine of the images you have listed are claimed to be public domain on their Commons pages. You can use public domain material however you see fit, although it would be polite to say where you got it.
The text of Wikipedia article is licenced under CC-BY-SA. Read the page for the full conditions, but basically you must do two things if you use Wikipedia text. You must credit the authors of the article and you must licence your derivative work in the same manner. Crediting the authors is commonly done by providing a hyperlink back to the original article. If you cannot provide a link you can find a list of the contributers on the "history" tab of the article (which may be very long). However, if you have only used Wikipedia as a source and written in your own words then there is no copyright issue, although you may still want to list Wikipedia amongst your sources. Note that the links on your blog do not go to the Wikipedia article. They go to the Commons category page for her.
I do not understand what page you mean that has 2,300 photographs. It sounds like a higher level Commons category. Can you link to it? Spinning Spark 22:57, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--1artgirl (talk) 03:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)TO: SpinningSpark THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION ABOVE: Yes, you can link to it---first, click on to this link: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Dorothea_Lange and then go down the page to this: Subcategories: This category has the following 2 subcategories, out of 2 total. L [×] Migrant Mother by Dorothea Lange‎ (1 P, 12 F) *******This is the 1st link to click on!!!!!![reply]

M [×] Photographs by Dorothea Lange of Manzanar War Relocation Center‎ (457 F) *********This is the 2nd link to click on!!!!!

PAGES IN CATEGORY "Dorothea Lange" The following 2 pages are in this category, out of 2 total. Dorothea Lange Creator:Dorothea Lange Media in category "Dorothea Lange" The following 201 files are in the current category. (previous 200) (next 200) This is where the 2,300 files are found in 200 images per page!!!!!Thanks for answering so quickly!!! I appreciate that very much!!!--1artgirl (talk) 03:05, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can find the licence for any picture on Wikipedia by clicking on it. This will take you to the item's description page. Scroll down and either under "Licences" or "Permission" you will find the licence or a statement that it is public domain. Works by all US federal government employees made in the course of their duties are automatically public domain no matter which agency they work for. Images which are not public domain on Wikipedia are mostly licenced with a Collective Commons licence, the same as the text. But be cautious, there are some that do not have a free licence and every picture must be checked individually. Spinning Spark 23:08, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Commons:Category:Dorothea_Lange]] includes 2317 files, so yes, that's probably what the poster intended. That's a substantial fraction of her 3900 images in that collection at the LoC. Each one used should be checked, but the LoC cataloguing indicates the FSA images usage rights. LeadSongDog come howl! 05:25, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--1artgirl (talk) 03:15, 5 May 2012 (UTC)Lead Song Dog---What does LoC mean? What does it stand for?--1artgirl (talk) 03:08, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--1artgirl (talk) 03:16, 5 May 2012 (UTC)MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT COPYRIGHT!! So in other words, I can use these 9 images as long as I correctly give a credit for each one to Wikipedia and also to where they came from for example: correctly give license #number if they are from the NARA, along with the link as to what page they were found in Wikipedia Creative Commons, correct?[reply]

Okay---so tell me about the FAS!! I don't understand what their copyright policies are as far as the slides of Dorothea Lange and the pictures that you have in that file of 2,300 that were stated as <This is a retouched picture, which means that it has been digitally altered from its original version. Modifications: Color added using the GIMP. The original can be viewed here: Lange-MigrantMother02.jpg.> Except for the Gimp part, the other FSA phtographs wre in black and white---still---the credentials say at the bottom of the page of licensing that (they have been altered from the original version) because the original version is on slide negatives so if they (the photographs found in the Creative Commons link in Wikipedia with the 2,300 and some other black and white images) have been re-altered from those slides then the images have to be considered public domain and copyright free, correct?

Also another question concerning the post from my blog that will be published: I didn't give but one credit and that was to Wikipeda where the article can be found (correct link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothea_Lange and also? the person that wrote the article for Wikipedia) so where do I find the name of the person who published this article to Wikipedia and responsible for the information in the article so I can credit them properly? Also,I am confused about one other thing---What about the pictures that are not on the page of the article that I used from the Creative Commons section of images in the post? Do I credit each photograph from the file that I got it from (the page where the image is shown in the Creative Commons file) and then also the license number from the other files that contributed, for example: the NARA and also the FSA?--1artgirl (talk) 02:54, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]