User talk:Danicroi
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Danicroi, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Adam and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:34, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
Image without license
[edit]Unspecified source/license for File:Latin America Map.png
[edit]
Thanks for uploading File:Latin America Map.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 20:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Draft feedback
[edit]Nice start on your draft.
My first thought is that you probably shouldn't title your article "in 2017". Instead, you should go with something like "Economy of Latin America". Situating your information in time is excellent: "in 2017" is good. Situating your article is time is less good - "Looking forward to 2017"; Wikipedia articles should be up to date, but timeless. Your lead section also need to be reworked. It should summarize all the main points make in the body of the article, in a few paragraphs.
Beyond that, my comments are mostly about formatting. References go after punctuation, not before. And only the article title is normally bolded. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:31, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Interesting. I definitely see it as a stand-alone article. I don't think we do "current" state of the economy article though, so I think I disagree with Roger on the title. Ideally, I'd lean towards adding a bit of a history section, even if it's short and incomplete. Take a look at the Economy of Argentina and the Economy of Brazil pages for some sense of what these articles tend to look like. And even if you can't add all those sections, scaffolding them a bit (so that other people can expand them later) would be my suggestion. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:03, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- "Economy of Latin America" would be more in keeping with the way these article are title.
- The lead should start with a sentence that tries to answer the question "What is [x]". If someone Googles the topic, the box you see at top right of the page is going to draw heavily from the first sentence or two of your article. Your goal then, should be to tell readers what they need to know as quickly as possible, and then let those who want to know more learn more by continuing to read. So very roughly speaking, I would make the first paragraph of your lead the third paragraph, and try to make the second paragraph (now the first) a bit punchier in terms of how quickly it delivers key info to the reader. Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:27, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Danni, thanks for making it live. I'm sure that's the best way to deal with this, because a) it's "acceptable" and b) that's how Wikipedia works; others can now dive in and do stuff. Including me.
Please keep an eye on its talk page, because that's the best place to discuss improvements to it; also you'll be able to look at the pages history to see who changes what.
I will probably make some edits myself, and I'll probably comment on the talk page too.
It's often quicker for me to just edit it and change things than to explain to you what you could do; but if you see my edits in the history, they'll have good edit summaries and they should give you ideas for further improvements.
One quick thing, I just noticed a sentence that doesn't make sense; will cause diplomatic relations between the United States and Latin America more volatile. Maybe should be "...America to be more volatile?
Best of luck, etc, 86.20.193.222 (talk) 03:44, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
P.S. Ian gave excellent advice about looking to similar articles; this will sound a bit odd but, try reading Economy of the Han dynasty. Yep, ancient economics, but it's a "featured article" which means it's pretty damn good. 86.20.193.222 (talk) 03:51, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
References go after punctuation, not before. e.g.
Something.<ref>http://www... </ref>
Not
Something<ref>http://www... </ref>.
Don't bother fixing them on the article; someone will use an automatic thing. I'm just telling you for future edits. 86.20.193.222 (talk) 04:23, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Article talk pages
[edit]Hi Danicroi. I just wanted to let you know that I removed your post from Talk:Latin American economy. Article talk pages are places where concerned editors can discuss specific ways to improve the article in question; they are not really places for general discussion about the subject matter itself or for making forum-type comments. I'm sure your post was made in the best intentions, but "welcoming" may be seen by some as some kind of implied ownership, and we as editors do not really have any form of ownership over our edits or over any articles we may create. I realize you're a new editor so I'm certainly not trying to discourage you; proper talk page use is an important part of the collaborative editing process, so the earlier you familiarize yourself with it, the better. I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for reference. Happy editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Article review
[edit]Hi! I'm going to be helping Adam and Wiki Ed out for a little while, so I wanted to respond to your review request for Latin American economy.
Offhand it looks good, but it could possibly use more explanation in the article here and there. The reason for this is that while some users might be aware of some of the specifics and what you may be referring to while to others sentences like "In 2016, the Latin American economy contracted 0.7%." may be a bit confusing since it doesn't say what they contracted before moving to the next sentence. I also noticed that at one point you forgot to link to the citation - it's the sentence "This deficit is expected to stand at 3.8% of GDP in 2017 [3].".
You should also make sure that you source claims like "Estimates for inflation for 2017 are 5.5%.", as that particular statement (in the section for Mexico) wasn't backed up with anything. Sourcing is especially important when you're writing about things that might happen, as in the case of the sentence "There is a risk that inflation dynamics could be affected further by the volatility of the Mexican Peso.". Without a source that explicitly states this claim this can be seen as original research, which should be avoided in articles. The best way to fix that would be to provide the source and write it as "Economist John Smith has stated that there is a risk that inflation dynamics could be affected further by the volatility of the Mexican Peso."(source), as putting the name of who said it (or the organization) would show that it isn't original research. You have statements like this in a few places.
I also noted that you had a section in the Regional risks section about Donald Trump. Some of the sentences need some work, notably this sentence since it reads a little awkward: "Given Donald Trump’s sharp rhetoric about immigrants and Mexico, and the context of potential policy shifts affecting trade will cause diplomatic relations between the United States and Latin America to be more volatile." Other than that, be careful when it comes to things that could be seen as controversial, such as the Trump Presidency's effect on the Latin American economy. I'd mostly recommend that you do something akin to the recommendation above, where you state who is making this claim - in this case The Economist.
Other than that, the only other thing I noted was that there was concern at the talk page that the page overlapped pre-existing articles on Economy of Central America, Economy of South America, and Economy of North America. I think that there's good justification for an article that talks about the overall economics of Latin America, but it's something to keep an eye on just in case. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 08:20, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
Ways to improve Latin American economy
[edit]Hi, I'm Markdask. Danicroi, thanks for creating Latin American economy!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Many of the references are plain text - i.e. inaccessable, It would immensely improve the quality of those references were direct links.I have done reference 1 as a guide. Also in many cases the reference details are duplicated in the text - unnecessary if the references are live links. For that reason I have also tagged the article as needing cleanup.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.