Jump to content

User talk:Rmark1030

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rmark1030 (talk | contribs) at 03:08, 23 August 2015 (→A discussion posted on Teahouse which may belong on this talk page as a matter of etiquette: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Your submission at Articles for creation: Alberto Gómez Gómez (July 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 00:58, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Rmark1030, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 00:58, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alberto Gómez Gómez (July 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Primefac was:
Nothing has been done to address the issues from the previous decline.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Primefac (talk) 20:45, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alberto Gómez Gómez (August 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Sulfurboy (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello! Rmark1030, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Sulfurboy (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Rmark1030. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:17, 6 August 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Rmark1030, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Happy Squirrel (talk) 14:25, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments on Draft:Alberto Gómez Gómez

Hello, after responding at the Teahouse, I have read through and done a bit of work on your draft. I have a few comments about it:

  • The draft was written in a rather poetic style. It was a very enjoyable read, but not a good fit for an encyclopedia. I have tried to correct this. Among other things, this poetic style means that facts were more spaced apart, giving the impression to the reviewers that there were few footnotes.
  • References to facebook are generally considered suspect. I have removed one and tagged the other. If you can either 1)demonstrate the facebook accounts are official and from someone reliable or 2)find alternate references, that would be great.
  • I have placed a few other citation needed tags where I felt a footnote could be useful.
  • In general, the whole article needs more links to other Wikipedia articles. I have done some of this, but this is an area for improvement. That being said, this is a minor issue.

Anyways, I think the draft is ready to pass with some minimal improvements. If you could address these issues, I would be happy to pass it myself. Happy editing! Happy Squirrel (talk) 14:35, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Happy Squirrel for your attention to my draft of Alberto Gómez Gómez (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Alberto_G%C3%B3mez_G%C3%B3mez). Your comments were helpful and (I'm hoping) completely understood. What's puzzling, however is the very first tag. It is beneath a direct to the artist -- "I marveled at my mother's perceptions of the world around her. For her, in her manic phases; past, present and future occupied the same mental space. Her passionate proclamations were focused, awful, beautiful, overwhelming. To bring to any piece of work that compelling sense of clarity, certainty and interrelation — that has always been my greatest challenge." -- for which I furnished a citation. However, immediately below, there is a "citation needed" tag. Does it refer to the quote above? (I do have a citation there). Does it belong to the text below? Again, thanks for your time and attention. Rmark1030 (talk) 23:33, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Yes it does. The current reference is to Facebook, which is generally considered weak, though barely acceptable for direct quotes. If you could find a written transcript or a video in a more reliable location, it would be better. However, if that is not possible, and it very well may not be, just remove the "citation needed" template. I agree the quote is significant and should be kept. I wish there were an "improve reference" tag for inline use, but I have never seen one so I have to use what I have :). Anyways, best of luck with your draft. I have it on my watchlist and am keeping an eye on it. Happy Squirrel (talk) 02:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More thanks to you, Happy Squirrel. As I gather it, a "weak" citation, as with a direct quote from Facebook, may or may not make the cut but will always be trumped by reliable published material. It seems possible that an article might survive with a surgical removal of material with a questionable source -- which (I'm guessing) might be re-inserted when another more reliable source is located(?) Thanks again. Rmark1030 (talk) 10:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. For the moment you have enough strong citations that the survival of the article is not so much in question. However, information with weak or no citations can be removed at any time by anyone. Some of the information tagged as being without source or weakly sourced is interesting so I thought I would give you a chance to source it. However, if you can't find a source, removal is definitely the way forward. Of course, none of this is permanent. Every previous version of every page on Wikipedia is accessible via the "View history" tab, barring serious privacy/copyright violations, and the information can be reused when a better source is found. Happy editing! Happy Squirrel (talk) 12:18, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, again. The draft for Alberto Gómez Gómez might pass muster now. Citations were included where indicated (and where possible) and a partial rewrite with a supporting citation was added (where no appropriate alternative could be found). There is a question about what's permissible for external links for which I can find no clear guideline, vis a vis, whether or not it can refer to the artist's website or dedicated facebook page -- but otherwise, I think it's all kosher. Thanks again for your kind assistance.
Hello, yes I was starting to think it was ready. Just submit it and I will happily accept it. External links are trickier, you are right. Generally, the standard is common sense (so no standard at all :) ). Usually, a link to the artist's website and official facebook page should be acceptable. Good job! Happy Squirrel (talk) 19:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and Gloriosky! Submitted now. (External Links will have to wait -- this is too cool to delay)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alberto Gómez Gómez has been accepted

Alberto Gómez Gómez, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Happy Squirrel (talk) 19:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray! You created your Teahouse profile!

Welcome to the Teahouse Badge Welcome to the Teahouse Badge
Awarded to editors who have introduced themselves at the Wikipedia Teahouse.

Guest editors with this badge show initiative and a great drive to learn how to edit Wikipedia.

Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
Thank you for introducing yourself and contributing to Wikipedia! If you have any questions feel free to drop me a line at my talk page. Happy Editing!

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Rmark1030. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Mz7 (talk) 02:37, 17 August 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Re:Can anyone help with a URL error message which chokes on a foreign web address?

Hello, Rmark1030. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Marchjuly (talk) 02:17, 19 August 2015 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

A discussion posted on Teahouse which may belong on this talk page as a matter of etiquette

Wikipedia is as specific as can be reasonably expected on what should be cited. It is equally specific on what should not be cited, e.g. "Citations are also often discouraged in the lead section of an article, insofar as it summarizes information for which sources are given later in the article..." Yet this dictum is ignored by Alpha Monarch in the lead to Alberto Gómez Gómez as regards the statement that "He is best known for producing monumentally scaled murals in public forums in the United States and Colombia..." -- points that are made and amply supported in the text below. Then, too, pictures by the artist in this article which bear directly on descriptive points have been deleted -- one which demonstrates the monumental nature of the artist's murals by including a photo of the artist in front of one of this works -- and another which illuminates the points (which are duly cited in the preceding paragraph) by adding an example of work which typifies them with a clarity that no amount of text could possibly portray as effectively.

This is not to mention that an article concerning a visual artist with one and only one visual (and a relatively uncharacteristic visual at that) is mystifying. No encyclopedia I have ever seen does this -- I question that Wikipedia's mission can be served by limiting itself this way. It defies the very subject of visual art and artist.

If this were not enough, the method of converting the citations to a more professional format than I was capable of (many heartfelt thanks to Marchjuly for that, by the way) nevertheless resulted in html-like ref tags in the read-view, making for a very messy unprofessional look to the article overall.

This is inasmuch as to say that, in several instances, both the spirit and the letter of Wikipedia policy and style is undermined by what I am quite certain are misled good intentions.

I would like to be clear that, as per Wikipedia advice, I do indeed assume good faith. But I stand by my belief that some of the recent edits are a misinterpretation of Wikipedia styled and substance and, in fact, inconsistent with the spirit of Wikipedia policy and/or intent. And this is even disregarding that it's possible that a close reading of "the letter of the law" so to speak may have been honored.

Thank you for your attention. I'm confident that any response this may receive will be valuable and helpful to my future efforts.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rmark1030&oldid=677414113"