This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
Hello, I'm trying to write a series of contemporary author profiles, so any help you could provide would be much apprecited. The article was rated as a starter page, which states that it could use better documentation. I've documented almost every sentence (in some cases I've combined reference notes: this is the reason that not every sentence has its own footnote.) I've used only secondary sources from reputable publishers (i.e. academic presses, journals, some online like The Electronic Book Review, some in paper like The American Book Review). I don't think the "Starter" designation is referring to the documentation but if I'm wrong could someone point out how it could be improved. Or is the "Starter" designation referring to something else. Your help is much appreciated!
Sharee Dossier (talk) 01:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sharee: Those ratings are more subjective than they may appear to be, but I note that in this instance the project banner was created automatically as part of the process of converting the article from an AfC submission. So I suspect it says "start" mainly because no one from the relevant WikiProject has got around to assessing the article yet. You could go to Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Biography and ask for someone to assess it. As to your broader question - I see a specific cosmetic issue, that there are several URLs placed after the item using angled brackets; this is a website, so we prefer to link them: the syntax is [http://..... Title of page] (i.e.: the URL followed by a space and then the title/link text, all within single square brackets. And there are two issues raised in the template at the top of the article: a lack of incoming links and a need for copyediting (which may well refer primarily to the URL point). At a glance, I don't see much wrong with the article; it does indeed have adequate referencing (although I'm unfamiliar with the Electronic Book Review and thus not sure how reliable a source it is), it's clearly laid out, seems to offer adequate coverage, and I found what's said in the lead paragraph about his work to be borne out in the body. Good job, I would say, boding well for the next one you write :-) Yngvadottir (talk) 07:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. This really helps! It's good to know too as I noticed that there are more third-party references on the Tomasula page then in many of the author pages I used as a model. I cleaned up the cosmetic questions (embedded URLS) you pointed out (Thanks!) so I hope the article can be upgraded once a wiki editor assesses it. For future reference The Electronic Book Review is, I think, one of the oldest on-line, peer-reviewed literary journals (i.e. most reliable, especially for peer-reviewed, web publishing of literary criticism). I think it started publishing in 1996 or so. I'm surprised there isn't a Wiki article about it. Someone should write one!
Sharee Dossier (talk) 01:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]