User talk:Htaroli

Htaroli, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Htaroli! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Mz7 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:06, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Htaroli, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor 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
Choosing an article to edit Editing an article • Add images to articles Citing sources on Wikipedia
Additional Resources
You can find answers to many student questions on our Q&A site, ask.wikiedu.org

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:27, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Draft notes

Hi! I have some notes for your draft:

• Be careful of words like 'renowned', as these are often seen as either subjective or (more commonly) marketing terms used to promote someone or something. There is a lot of this in the article, which may be a result of relying so heavily on primary sources or because of so much close paraphrasing.

• Be very careful of sourcing. Not all Internet results will be seen as reliable sources on Wikipedia. All of the sources here are primary at best, so they cannot establish notability for Able, even if they make claims of importance. Also, when using a source that reprints information from an official source (such as the Artsy site) it's better to just cite the official source if it's readily available, such as if they're reprinting content from an official website. You also want to make sure that the source backs up the claim being made in the article.

• When it comes to anything that could be seen as an interpretation of Able's work or thought process, make sure that you are only summarizing what has been explicitly stated in the source material. Anything that could be seen as an opinion or interpretation should be attributed to the person making the claim. I've edited your intro section to take care of some parts, but also to fix a close paraphrasing. I turned it into an attributed quote. However the issue here is that upon reading the page I saw that there were many issues like this in the article. More on that in a moment.

The most major issue here is that a large chunk of the article is either close paraphrasing or taken nearly verbatim from the source materials. This is something that would be considered plagiarism or at the very least a copyright violation, even if you were to cite the sources the material was taken from. Always be careful when writing article content - a good way to avoid doing this is to take notes while reading and write your article from those notes.

Unless the material is explicitly marked as falling into the public domain or was released under a compatible Creative Commons license, it should be assumed that the content is copyrighted in a way that would prohibit it from being used verbatim elsewhere. It's always best to write things in your own words, as this can help prevent issues like this from arising. I would like for you to review the module on plagiarism and copyright.

I'm going to try to re-write this to resolve the copyright/plagiarism issues. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:15, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

• OK, I've edited this down so it shouldn't pose a copyright or tone issue. I've also replaced the Artsy sources with the official websites for Able and her gallery, as the website was copying from there. I also want to note that some of the content was a bit more detail than Wikipedia usually prefers. For example, how much something costs or where it can be purchased isn't really of importance to Wikipedia unless there is a lot of coverage about that specific detail. Wikipedia is more interested in more of a general overview for the most part.

In any case about the close paraphrasing, I don't think that this was intentional plagiarism - I do see where you were trying to change up some of the writing, so I don't think that I'm going to report this. I'm going to just give you a warning to be very, very careful when writing in the future to make sure that you're not copying or closely paraphrasing. I've hidden the past revisions since it does still pose a copyright issue, though. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:11, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

• This brochure goes over creating and editing biographies, so this would be good to review since it goes over the sourcing requirements. I'm a little concerned that there may not be enough independent, reliable secondary sources to establish notability. These can be things like reviews of her work in the newspaper and the like. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:24, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Carrie Able

The article Carrie Able has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unfortunately does not meet WP:GNG, WP:NCREATIVE, or WP:MUSICBIO. I couldn't find any more coverage in an internet search.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:37, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Carrie Able for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Carrie Able is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carrie Able (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SD0001 (talk) 06:32, 1 October 2019 (UTC)