User talk:Madalena77

December 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Art manifesto has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Art manifesto was changed by Madalena77 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.866135 on 2020-12-18T09:59:09+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 09:59, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The content you added was copied from another website, and thus was a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 15:53, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: The Symbiotic Art Manifesto was published in 2003 and should be included in the Art Manifestos page.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nonhuman art (December 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Animal-made art instead.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nonhuman art and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Nonhuman art, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 08:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Madalena77! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 08:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Nonhuman art (December 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by ReaderofthePack were:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Computer art instead.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia uses the neutral third person - avoid using terms like you, we, and so on. You also appear to draw comparisons and other original research. Keep in mind that we can only summarize what others have explicitly stated in reliable sources. This also lacks in-line citations, which is needed to show what is sourcing what. Finally, this is already covered at Applications_of_artificial_intelligence#Art and at Computer art.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Nonhuman art and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Nonhuman art, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi Madalena77! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Symbiotic Art Manifesto (December 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Madalena77/sandbox/Symbiotic Art Manifesto and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Madalena77/sandbox/Symbiotic Art Manifesto, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Symbiotic Art Manifesto (December 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Calliopejen1 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Symbiotic Art Manifesto and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Symbiotic Art Manifesto, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Symbiotic Art Manifesto (January 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ReaderofthePack was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This needs coverage that is about this specific manifesto, as opposed to coverage about the topic of machine created artwork. The coverage must also be in places that Wikipedia would consider reliable. Self-published sources like blogs are rarely going to be seen as reliable sources unless we can establish that the person writing it and their blog are routinely seen as reliable sources by other reliable sources.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Symbiotic Art Manifesto and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Symbiotic Art Manifesto, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

ReaderofthePack Please consider: Fact1: The Manifesto was first included in a book published by an important (and reliable) Contemporary Art Institut and not a blog...
Fact2: It has been reproduced in many other places and was the object of debate in articles, conferences, and of course the Internet Fact3: An Art Manifesto is itself a statement and not a theoretical or academic endeavor... (Madalena77 (talk) 10:23, 1 January 2021 (UTC)) Madalena77[reply]

In response to the first part, notability is not inherited by the notability of the publisher or of the general topic of AI generated artwork. When I mentioned the blog, I was referring to one of the links in the article, which was to a self-published blog that was written by neither of the authors of the manifesto. Unless you can provide proof that this blog and its author are routinely seen as reliable sources by other reliable sources (ie, academic and scholarly sources in specific) then it's going to be seen as unreliable per Wikipedia's guidelines.

As far as reproductions go, this by itself doesn't always establish notability. What's needed here is coverage of the manifesto in places Wikipedia would consider to be reliable. The issue here is that the sourcing here is primary and the other links go to places that either don't discuss this specific work or are places Wikipedia wouldn't consider to be reliable.

Keep in mind that the coverage would have to discuss the manifesto in specific rather than Moura's overall stance on AI generated artwork, which is one of the central issues here with establishing notability. I did a quick search myself and ultimately saw that when it was mentioned, it was in passing, brief mentions. It was never the focal point of coverage in reliable sources, rather the focus was on the general topic of AI art and/or Moura's work on the topic. Even in the sources that would be questionable or outright unusable, the focus still wasn't on the manifesto itself.

Also keep in mind that individual written works like articles or manifestos are unlikely to gain the necessary coverage to justify an individual article, regardless of the notability of the topic or author - even if either the topic or author seem to be overwhelmingly notable. This is one of those scenarios where a written work just isn't independently notable as far as I could find via searches on a college database or Google search. (The college in question has a sizable arts program, so it would absolutely have general good resources when it comes to art.)

Now as far as the third point goes, it doesn't matter if this was written as a statement or as an academic/scholarly or theoretical endeavor. At the end of the day an article can only establish notability via coverage for that specific topic, which is lacking for the manifesto. This is long enough so I'll cut this off here. Long story short, I will not approve the draft. You're welcome to improve and resubmit it, but I doubt that any other editor will respond differently without substantial improvement. I'm also not really convinced that the coverage is existent for this specific manifesto. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My overall recommendation is to summarize Moura's work on the overall topic of AI generated art and create a section on his article. The topic must be sourced better, as unsourced work can be seen as original research and removed. I don't know that any individual statement, paper, or similar written work would be independently notable. As stated above, it's fairly uncommon for a person's work to be individually notable and in most cases coverage tends to discuss the totality of an individual's work on a given topic rather than discuss an individual piece. This being art related doesn't negate that. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You left a similar note on my talk page but added "it is not interesting to add dozens of links and references". Sourcing is a requirement for articles on Wikipedia. There don't have to be hundreds of sources, but there does need to be enough to establish notability. To establish notability sourcing has to be independent of the work or person, discuss the topic in question (in this case an art manifesto), and to be in a place Wikipedia would see as reliable.

If this is a matter of you not wanting to find and add sourcing, then this poses a major issue because unsourced or improperly sourced articles will get deleted (or declined in the case of drafts) and content will be removed. I'm not trying to discourage you or tell you to stop. I'm just emphasizing how vital this is and that not sourcing properly will only result in the continued decline of the drafts. I will, however, ask that you not make any live edits beyond light copyediting until you are familiar with and agree to follow Wikipedia's guidelines on reliable sources. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've also made this into its own section for ease of finding this. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just added two academic theses that refer to the Manifesto. Anyway, on behalf of my contribution, I would like to add that, although maybe not enough notable, the Manifesto raises a key question on machine creativity, which is a topic of today. Hence, from my point of view, it is a matter of justice to include it in Wikipedia. Madalena77 (talk) 15:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My idea was to refer to the Symbiotic Manifesto, which is not listed in the Art manifesto article, and it should be, and not to write about the author who has already an article Leonel Moura. That's why I don't know exactly what to do and appreciate your help. Madalena77 (talk) 16:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Madalena77! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Computer Art, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days (usually at least two days, and sometimes four or more). You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to create a new thread.

The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Symbiotic Art Manifesto (January 10)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Chicdat was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This has been declined three times with no improvement, and has only two references that fail WP:SIGCOV.

🐔 Chicdat ^{Bawk to me!} 11:27, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Symbiotic Art Manifesto

Hello, Madalena77. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Symbiotic Art Manifesto, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Nonhuman art

Hello, Madalena77. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Nonhuman art".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 10:48, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]