Jump to content

User talk:CTF83!

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Amandajoan1872 (talk | contribs) at 07:27, 19 July 2008 (The Duck Creek Flooding: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.





Neighborhoods of Davenport, Iowa

Hi there. I was looking up what the Wikipedia guidelines have to say in this area, but in the process I think I have found an issue with nominating Neighborhoods of Davenport, Iowa for GA status; the article, in essence, is a list, which by their very nature cannot qualify for GA status. All the other "Neighborhoods of Pick Any Town, USA" are lists. The one on Davenport just happens to be a list with more detail. Each one of the neighborhoods, however, could potentially have its own article which would then qualify for GA status, provided it meets the criteria.

Instead of a good article, I would suggestion that you nominate Neighborhoods of Davenport, Iowa as a Featured list candidate instead. Best, epicAdam (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it sure is a list, albeit a short one. At it's heart, it's just a list of the different neighborhoods such as Downtown, West Third Street, Hamburg, Cork Hill, East Fourteenth Street, College Square, etc. Really, that's a list. I would just nominate for Feature list or request help from those folks to see what you can do to improve it. If you'd like, you can use the information collected for the Neighborhoods list and make each one of those neighborhoods an article, such as articles on Lafayette Square, Buffalo, Milwaukee Avenue Historic District, and Washington Park, Chicago (neighborhood). Each one of those are good articles about individual neighborhoods. But also notice, that each one of those goes into considerable detail. So before you make an article about each neighborhood in Davenport, make sure that you have plenty of stuff to say about it before nominating it for GA status! At the moment, the information collected for each one would be enough for stub-class articles. Hope this helps! Best, epicAdam (talk) 20:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, there isn't anything a step below "Featured list". Although, I don't think your list isn't up for being a featured list. You can always nominate it and see what suggestions the list reviewers have, if any. Oh yeah, and I forgot. Happy Pride Month. Hopefully you guys have something neat out there in order to celebrate. Best, epicAdam (talk) 20:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know much about the featured lists nor am I familiar with their criteria (just discovered it this morning), so I don't think I'd be the one to pass it... The featured list candidate page does seem like it's pretty active so you'd likely get a quick review one way or the other. Have fun in Boystown, we're still cleaning up from D.C. pride over here. :-) Later! epicAdam (talk) 20:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would have to agree with Epicadam. This does look like a list, similar to this article which I encountered at WP:FLC. I would recommend you find more sources for the article, preferably ones that were publishing recently, since it seems you're relying on a 20+ year old publication to describe houses and buildings (which easily may have changed since then). Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 21:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That depends. Do you know who published it? Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 14:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It looks fine to me. Is the Quad Cities bureau operated by the cities' governments? Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:39, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it could be considered a reliable source, assuming that the Quad Cities bureau is an authority on the matters being discussed in the pamphlet. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 12:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo's drawings

Leonardo's artworks fell into several categories: paintings, drawings, sculpture. The Mona Lisa and the Last Supper are his two best-known paintings. This is not OR. They appear in far more books, reproductions, parodies, tapestries, carpets, stamps, cameos etc than any of his other works. The Vitruvian Man is by far his best-known drawing, being reproduced in every media from gold-plated cigarette boxes to t-shirts. The statement in the box says that it is his best known drawing', not that it is his best known artwork. Amandajm (talk) 14:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Putting a Fact tag on it is pointless. The evidence that it is his best known drawing is a thousand publications. Moreover, a very large number of reproductions have nothing whatsoever to do with the man and his art; the work is used to illustrate books and articles on science, philosophy, drawing, mathematics...you name it.
Facts really only need citation if they are questionable, or may be challenged by another person who knows the subject. If someone comes along and doesn't notice that the statement says "drawing", then they simply need to read it properly. Amandajm (talk) 06:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ctjf, you just referred to that drawing as "a portrait". Previously, you equated "drawing" with "painting" or "artwork". This does indicate that you are a person who has little knowledge of pictures. Even so, it surprises me that you don't know that this is Leonardo's most famous drawing. Art History books don't normally state "this is Leonardo's most famous drawing". They just reproduce it, over and over again, as do history books, philosophy books, mathematics text boooks, anatomy text books, posters, t-shirts, coffee mugs, stamps, book-covers, etc etc etc etc. You may not recognise that this drawing is by Leonardo, but most people who have a good general knowledge do know it and recognise it, in the same way as they recognise the Taj Mahal, Che Guevera and the symbol for Pi. The picture is so well-known that in Dan Brown's "Da Vinci Code" the book starts off with the Louvre Museum curator deliberately laying himself in that position to die. In the book, the curator knows that his position will be immediately recognisable to anyone who sees him. What he does is a clue. It's not just a clue for a highly-knowledgable expert on symbolism; it is also a clue for the readers. Brown expects that his readers will know this drawing, because it's general knowledge; it's the sort of thing that a kid may not know, but that most people who have finished high school have seen and know about. So what you are doing is a bit like demanding a reference that proves that the Statue of Liberty is the best-known landmark in New York, or that John Lennon was a member of the Beatles.
If you look up Vitruvian Man on Google images, you'll get over 19,000 hits. Now, that is roundabout 19,000 reproductions of that famous image, or a parody of it, in which the person who has put up the image has actually called it by the correct name. This doesn't include all the times that the image appears un-named, or called something like "Leonardo's drawing showing proportion of the human form" or "Leonardo's drawing of a man in a square and a circle". (Normally, when you Google search an image, you get all sorts of pics as well as the one you really want, eg a search on Mona Lisa will bring up girls' faces, cats, flowers and all sorts of things, but nearly every single one of the 19,000 Vitruvian man images show either the actual drawing or a copy of some sort.)
Here are some examples, all of which presume that you, the viewer, will immediately recognise the source. No other drawing (NOTE: I mean drawing, not painting) in the world has been used in this way. Hope you enjoy them!:

[1], [2], [3], [4], [5],[6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]

Amandajm (talk) 02:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Duck Creek Flooding

Hey CTJF83, the flooding incidents I mentioned were facts. Those were really important statements of very urgent priority. I've tried representing sources, except Wikipedia doesn't always regard the sources connected with the Floods of 1990 and 2008 around Duck Creek in the Quad Cities area. Help me please.

Amandajoan1872 (talk) 21:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Duck Creek Flooding

The Duck Creek Flooding during 1990 was documented under Davenport Iowa for reasons of urgent importance. The same thing for Thursday June 12 for 2008. The River Area isn't the only area in Davenport and Bettendorf which is flooding prone. Duck Creek is extremely vunerable to flash floodings. But not everybody is actually aware, particularly those who are the newest residents to Davenport Iowa. So many articles on the Flood of 1990 around Duck Creek and the Flash Floof of 2008 exist. it's important to include the facts.

Amandajoan1872 (talk) 07:27, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]