User talk:Arthistorian16

Welcome!

Hello, Arthistorian16, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --cjllw ʘ TALK 04:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yahui

...and thanks specifically for your addition of the above article. I've tweaked it a little, might need some more adjustments to put it into context for a non-specialist reader, but it's a very useful beginning; appreciated.

Just one follow-up re the references/citations supplied— I've expanded those I could readily identify into the 'references' section in a biblio-style format that we commonly use, and added a couple more. However, there was one work you've cited, as "Pierce 2006", that I'm unable to identify either the author or contribution. Possibly something by Donna Pierce, Curator of Spanish Colonial Art @ Denver Art Museum who seems to have done some research in the area..? Not sure if it's her or someone else from the info given, and not apparent which publication is meant. If you could provide some more details on this source to identify it—either in the article's reference section (don't worry bout getting the formatting right, that can easily be fixed up) or on the article's talk page—that would be great. Kind regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 04:22, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Thanks for the continued assistance. I am not an expert on formatting for Wikipedia, but will look over the guidelines. :)

Will add more as I have time. Sometime soon, I plan to upload a few drawings to help readers understand the visual forms of the creature.

Pierce is as follows: Pierce, Danielle L. The Yahui: Form and Function. [Unpublished] UMI Proquest, Ann Arbor, MI, 2006.

Happy Tuesday Arthistorian16 (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for clarifying!. Just to note, unpublished theses used as sources often run across difficulties in complying with wikipedia's verifiability and reliable sources policies. While the use of this one in that article isn't such a problem at the moment, over time it might be preferable to replace it with citations to more accessible, assessable and reliably published sources. Regards, --cjllw ʘ TALK 06:32, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appropriation (art)

Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia pages, even if your ultimate intention is to fix them. Such edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you.Modernist (talk) 16:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Next time use the talk page for your opinions - that is the appropriate place for your comments...Modernist (talk) 16:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel so strongly about fine-tuning the definition of "Appropriation (art)" I think that is potentially a very good thing. Bus stop (talk) 17:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good thing provided you add only credible and referenced text and not your opinion...Modernist (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I have already told you, direct your commentaries to article talk pages...your personal opinions are not warranted in the lead introduction to any article - no matter how much you disagree with the content....Modernist (talk) 05:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This comment of yours - Much of what is posted on the rest of this page is not cited, may be misleading or is just incorrect. This article needs a complete revision. has absolutely no place in a lead or introduction to an article...Place those opinions only on talk pages...If you wish to add dictionary definitions and/or other quoted sources that is feasible provided you reference your source..Modernist (talk) 05:51, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]