I have removed the external link to www.visualhistology.com, as it appears to be spam. (Advertising for a DVD set.) --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 00:37, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I do some microtomy and we cut slices as thin as 3um (which is usefull in the spleen as the nuclui are packet tightly) i'll go though this. Also there should be something about botanical samples (commonly cut with a sledge microtomb. Ill see if i can get a few microtomb shots — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.48.78 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 20 July 2005 UTC (UTC)

I posted my site Histology-World (http://www.histology-world.com). It was removed because it was "commercial". While I have advertisements on the site, it is not the thrust of the site. I would like to be able to have links to my site and my key features posted here.

If somebody could 1) go read my guestbook, so that you can see what students/users think of my site 2) review my "key features" section, so that you can see that this is useful content that cannot be incorporated into an article.

Go to small intestine, (http://www.histology-world.com/keyfeatures/smallintestine1.htm) for example, and you run the mouse over slides, and the image changes, and there is also a comparison to large intestine with special effects. Thus, I thought a link was more appropriate, so that the user/reader can get the special effect of compare and contrast.

I also have photomicrographs of all the histology that I was posting a link to. I do not own the copyright to the images; the publisher gave me the right to use them on my site. Thus, I cannot post the photomicrographs on this site. But, I can post a link to them here. For example, I posted a link to nervous tissue, so people could see what nervous tissue looked like. Yet, it was removed.

All my "key features" and links to my site were removed/edited out. So now, people cannot see the photomicrographs, nor can they get the compare and contrast with the key features.

I really think that links to my site under the external link section add useful content that cannot simply be incorporated into the site.

Please advise.

--Sarah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.68.228 (talk • contribs) 23:23, 7 February 2006 UTC (UTC)

It would be much preferable if the publisher could release some microphotographs under the WP:GFDL. If you would like to do so, please mention this at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Clinical medicine, where Wikipedia editors with a medical background may be able to assist. JFW | T@lk 05:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that your site is not commercial. It contains ads but also sells textbooks and CD-ROMS. It is also not authoratitive (i.e. supported or reviewed by a professional organisation), making it a less useful candidate for linking. JFW | T@lk 05:29, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say that it was not commercial, I have ads, and sell books...yes. But it is definately not the THRUST of ths site. Scroll up and re-read what I said.

Simply asking the publisher for the rights to publish his photomicrographs here does not solve the problem. I discuss the slides and use java effects in the discussion, as evidence here.

http://www.histology-world.com/keyfeatures/smallintestine1.htm

It is unfortunate, that because of the ads, my site cannot be included. As evident by all the comments in my guest book, people DO find my site useful and informative. It would have been a valuable addition.

--Sarah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.228.68.228 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 8 February 2006 UTC (UTC)

Please sign all posts on Talk pages (discussion) by appending four tildes ~~~~ so that the time, the date, and the user ID or IP address is automatically stamped. Hu 01:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]