User talk:RoboticArtProf

About Conflicts of Interest

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you.Jon513 (talk) 02:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if we seem suspicious, but given that the Karave article was your first; that you identify yourself as a robotics person at Concordia; and that Karave last studied at Karave, the suspicion that you were either Karave or a good friend/mentor of his was inescapable. Conflict of interest is a constant problem here.--Orange Mike | Talk 13:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

In response to Jon and Mike comments, pls excuse any repetitions in the dialogue but I am doing my best to respond to each comment. I am not a friend or family member of the artist in question, but someone who has seen the influence of Karave's work upon successive students here at Concordia, and seen the influence of his work in NYC. I am hoping to remain anonymous on the net, especially in the case that this article is removed, but if anyone is willing to pass on their email/contact I would be happy to list my credentials. I am trying my best to create an unbiased article, pls let me know where it can be improved. If i am wasting time pls let me know. I must admit it is quite frustrating to have to see the article tagged for deletion before it was even completed. The artist in question has an impressive list of galleries where his work has been shown, including an appearance at the largest music & art festival in the US, of which only a very select few are chosen. He is well known in contemporary art and activism circles in Montreal, New York and Tampa. I feel it would be a shame to delete the article. Footnotes have been diversified.--RoboticArtProf (talk) 18:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Also noting I would feel more comfortable if a person with experience in the contemporary art world would make a determination on this.--RoboticArtProf (talk) 18:48, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

About Conflicts of Interest

You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedia:Wikipedians with articles.) Thank you.Jon513 (talk) 02:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry if we seem suspicious, but given that the Karave article was your first; that you identify yourself as a robotics person at Concordia; and that Karave last studied at Karave, the suspicion that you were either Karave or a good friend/mentor of his was inescapable. Conflict of interest is a constant problem here.--Orange Mike | Talk 13:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mike, I am not a friend or family member of the artist in question, but someone who has seen the influence of Karave's work upon successive students here at Concordia, and seen the influence of his work in NYC. I am hoping to remain anonymous on the net, especially in the case that this article is removed, but if anyone is willing to pass on their email/contact I would be happy to list my credentials. I am trying my best to create an unbiased article, pls let me know where it can be improved. If i am wasting time pls let me know. I must admit it is quite frustrating to have to see the article tagged for deletion before it was even completed. The artist in question has an impressive list of galleries where his work has been shown, including an appearance at the largest music & art festival in the US, of which only a very select few are chosen. He is well known in contemporary art and activism circles in Montreal, New York and Tampa. I feel it would be a shame to delete the article. Footnotes have been diversified. --RoboticArtProf (talk) 17:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Also noting that if a person with a stated knowledge of the contemporary art world could make a determination, this would seem to be the most logical route.--RoboticArtProf (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

David Karave

Please learn something of how text is to be formatted in Wikipedia, just as your students would learn MLA or Turabian or whatever citation format you require. Titles of works, for example, are to be italicized like this (i.e., by enclosing them in matched sets of hatchmarks); they are not to be put in quotation marks. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mike, I'm very new here, and still learning. I have made the changes you advised.--RoboticArtProf (talk) 17:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello RoboticArtProf, I am the user who nominated the article for deletion. Please note that deletion is a process, and there must be a consensus to delete the article for it to be removed. It's not a straight up or down "vote". So it's nothing personal against the artist or the article creator, just my opinion on notability. Additionally, by "vanity" article I didn't mean that in the colloquial sense of "vanity" being equivalant to self-serving or grandious. Vanity, in Wikipedia context, usually means highlights of a persons contributions to work/art/society etc. without encyclopedic significance. Just wanted to clear that up with you, and happy editing to you. Keegan^talk 20:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Signature

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --Orange Mike | Talk 13:28, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much Mike, I am very new here so I am still learning how to use the system. --RoboticArtProf (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)