User talk:MaximoVicente1912
| This user is a student editor in University_of_Wyoming/Architectural_History_(Fall_2024) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, MaximoVicente1912, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Brianda and I work with Wiki Education; 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. Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
High Romanticism moved to draftspace
[edit]An article you recently created, High Romanticism, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. FishandChipper 🐟🍟 01:29, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- …and don't think of moving the draft yourself. Also, please read some guidance on creating an article. Your text dump with no wikilinks or inline references, but plenty of your own opinions, is nowhere close to acceptable. If you hadn't been a student, presumably given insufficient advice, I would have deleted on sight. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:16, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
Reply
[edit]Thanks for message. Note that you can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~.
When you write about a topic you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to an involved person, organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, and websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance.
Although you listed some sources at the bottom, they are not inline, so we don't know what fact each is supporting, and they are incomplete. If any are books or journals, they need page numbers, and books need isbns. You have attempted to provide links, but you have left them as bare urls which don't actually work, no https:// seems likely to be the problem.
The topic is probably notable, but we need the text to be fully sourced to confirm that.
The text is very short on real facts, and seems to be your own opinions, which is original research and not permitted here. For example, the only (unsourced) fact in your first paragraph is the dates, the rest is just opinions like Romanticism reached its peak due to the influence of the French Revolution and as a rebellion against Neo-classism. The French Revolution caused a desire to depict contemporary struggles, individual expression, and emotional intensity. Neoclassism was an era that celebrated reason as one of the highest ideals of human virtues. This caused empirical science to claim its authority over society. and so on. Even if you have taken this from an unattributed source, it's still just their opinion, although it can be quoted if they are a significant person.
You haven't wikilinked anything, eg Romanticism, French Revolution. You should read the first of those (note that the lead has no refs because it's a summary of the text).
You seem to have written an opinion piece or essay, not an encyclopaedia article as we require. I don't know what the terms of your assignment were, but the current text is nowhere near meeting our requirements, and won't be accepted by a reviewer in its current form.
I'm sorry I was brusque before, but we waste a lot of time picking up the pieces after students are told tow write a Wikipedia article with no apparent guidance. Writing a full article with no prior editing experience is difficult at the best of times, and even with 20 years of editing, I'd think twice about tackling this topic on my own. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:47, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Looking at your refs, I'm not sure that IPL is a reputable source Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am the student's instructor. While I appreciate most of your concerns, and support moving this to draftspace, it is incorrect that "students are told to write a Wikipedia article with no apparent guidance." Here you can see the multiple training exercises the students completed throughout the semester.
- I do accept that I should have reviewed this at the draft or sandbox stage and that it is not suitable for publication. Also I should have encouraged this student more strongly to pursue a more modest project; smaller contributions to an existing page.
- And a final note in defense of the student: Art History has peculiar writing conventions which are highly interpretive. So a phrase like "Romanticism reached its peak due to the influence of the French Revolution and as a rebellion against Neo-classicism" is surely not the student's opinion or original research, but something he read and paraphrased, likely from multiple sources. It should have an inline citation of course. Tdenzer (talk) 18:29, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Tdenzer. I'm not sure quite where we go from here, although modelling on Romanticism might be a way forward, if he's going to stick with this topic Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:36, 11 December 2024 (UTC)