User talk:PascalRoyal

Please remove your draft article from article categories

PascalRoyal, Please remove your draft article User:PascalRoyal/Pedro Costa (musician) from the article categories. You can do this by placing the nowiki html code. For example: [[Category:Musical groups established in 2006]].
I can do this for you, but I really don't like editing other people's pages. On a side note, you have link rot. I can help with that; see my user page User:Argolin/Sources. Argolin (talk) 23:55, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right off the bat, please sign your posts on talk pages. After you type/edit comments point your mouse to the four tildas below and select. I guess you're asking me to convert your references to correct the link rot? Was my [User:Argolin/Sources]] page too overwhelming, or you didn't know where to start? Please respond on my talk. Argolin (talk) 01:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No; you added the example to an article category. I'm very sorry myself. I just thought you would know what I meant. I went in and changed the draft article for you. When its ready to be moved to the live wikipedia, do not copy the categories in the edit mode: copy directly from User:PascalRoyal/Pedro Costa (musician).

Please re-copy a new version of the userbox from: Template:Infobox musical artist. Scroll down to find out what should and should not be placed in the fields. I believe what you have done (removing fields) will place the article in the hidden category Category:Articles using Infobox musical artist with deprecated parameters. Argolin (talk) 02:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my! The link rot has not been corrected on Pedro Costa (musician). New articles must be added to appropriate projects. The first and most obvious for this article is Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians. Further for WP:N Canadian musicians add Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music. Since, it's live now (I didn't think it was quite ready), I'll add these to the discussion page for you.

The most urgent thing (since it's now an article and not a draft) is to read WP:LEAD. You must answer this question "why is this musician notable" per WP:BAND? Argolin (talk) 04:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great use of the {{Talkback}} template! If you go back to my talk page, you'll see that I had to add the nowiki syntax to your previous post. It added my talk page to many inappropriate categories. Use the {{Tl| syntax before the template as above to avoid this problem. Give me a few minutes to correct one of your citations for link rot. Please follow the link to read what it is. Argolin (talk) 07:08, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recreation of previous deleted article Pedro Costa (musician)

It seems you have recreated a previously deleted article Pedro Costa (musician). I have no idea what the wiki warnings were when you did it. There was a warning when I tried to receate the discussion page telling me:

12:58, 6 October 2009 Moonriddengirl (Talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Pedro Costa (musician)" ‎ (G8): Talk page of a deleted page)

I know it was not deleted per the WP:Afd process. You should contact Moonriddengirl to find out exactly why it was deleted and to address the concerns (as to why the article was not notable and hence not included in wikipedia).

Since the article was previously deleted, it may be speedy deleted without the Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music being aware (it takes a day for the Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music/Article alerts to kick in). Argolin (talk) 05:19, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One thing at a time. How did you add it to the Canadian music project? I said I would. Argolin (talk) 05:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand how you added the article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Canadian music. My edit [1] did that. What edit did you do lead you to believe you added it to the Canadian music project? Argolin (talk) 06:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you didn't save your edit; but again remember I said Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians is the other project all musicians must be added to? Yes, there are a few more things you must do (this list is not complete by the way) to prevent another WP:CSD:

Spell check!
Obviously the red link to Portuguese ethnicity is wrong. I fixed a few in the article but didn't get a chance to talk to you about WP:DISAMBIG; I placed it in the edit summary.
Link rot
Please read the speedy deletion guideline WP:CSD PS, please indent your comments with a colons as above Argolin (talk) 06:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Still not seeing where the link rot is. All seem functional. And what do you mean by disambig? Does it have to do with how to determine which Pedro Costa takes the main name? Right now the film director has the plain one. PascalRoyal (talk) 06:50, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sorry (no the article's name you've choosen is OK), I corrected the disambig earlier with North Bay, Ontario as opposed to North Bay, Ontario and Sudbury, Ontario, Canada as opposed to Sudbury. I corrected your previous red link Portuguese descent to Portuguese and added other wiki links. The Link rot has to do with the references provided in an article. I've added one method to address it; do you still need help with the link rot? It's ok if you do; believe me when I started, I thought I would never add articles (I thought there were too many hoops to jump through!). :)

The article may still be deleted per Wikipedia:CSD. I'll contact Moonriddengirl for you to find out exactly why it was deleted. I believe this new article will not be subject to Wikipedia:CSD (I may be wrong). However, Moonriddengirl and/or others may still bring the article to a proposed deletion per WP:PROD or WP:Afd. The WP:PROD and WP:Afd is better as it provides the projects a chance to address any concerns as to why the article fails WP:N and specifically in this case WP:BAND. Argolin (talk) 08:27, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prior versions of the article, a few recommendations

Hi. Argolin asked me about this issue, and I let him know that the version of the article which I deleted was a copyright problem (I'm sure you recall: here). (By the way, the image currently used in the article needs permission verified the same way we needed it for the article in September 2009; I've left you a note at your Commons account. Please take care of that, because unless permission is confirmed the image is likely to be deleted after a week.)

There was a version prior to that which was speedily deleted because the musician did not seem notable at the time. I'm sorry that you weren't left a note; that's good practice, so that new users don't just see their efforts disappear. The administrator who deleted your version as of July 2009 did so with the explanation that ""Wikipedia is not a promotional database; unsigned artists who have yet to release their first album are not notable." Generally, this is true, although if an article suggests importance on the part of the subject, it's usually not speedily deleted. Instead, it may be subject to community review. As he has charting singles in Poland, I doubt he will be speedily deleted or subject to community review; he clears Wikipedia:Notability (music).

There are some concerns I have with the article as it is which I hope can be easily remedied. First, the article is sparse on sources overall, and they are completely lacking under "Early Years". We need these to verify that the information is true and accurate. When the information is confirming the subject's notability or is potentially promotional, we need the sourcing from somebody other than the subject. All this keeps us compliant with our core content policies, WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPV.

For example, you could use the subject's own website to source that he was a member of "4 Vocal FX" because it isn't the reason he would belong on Wikipedia. But you can't use the subject's own website to source that the band was "very popular". This is an opinion, and we need to know whose opinion it is. If it's the subject's, you have to acknowledge that or, preferably, omit it. There are other passages of concern to me. Here are two more examples. (1) "immortalized in a TV commercial for a local car dealership..." Who says they were "immortalized" by this commercial? Saying they were "immortalized" implies that somehow their performance will remain emblazoned in the annals of time. :) As Wiktionary points out, the word "immortalize" means "To make eternally famous." That's an extraordinary claim, and it needs to be supported or replaced with a neutral description, such as noting that they "appeared." (2) "An uplifting song" "uptempo" is neutral; "uplifting" is not. "Uplifting" implies that it evokes an emotional state in the listener. Just as with "very popular", you have to attribute points of view. You need to credit the critic and cite it or replace it with a neutral description.

Please read over the article looking for that kind of thing: words that carry value judgment or that promote the subject. Make sure, please, that extraordinary claims are cited immediately after they are made. Another example: if he gained notoriety, it should be easy enough to find a couple of sources talking about his releasing "the most successful song by a foreign independent artist in the last 30 years of Poland's singles chart". Tell us who has made these value judgments and voiced these opinions. Who has compared him to these artists and where?

Given that you've been with us now since June 2009 but only worked on this article, I do feel I need to point out to you our conflict of interest guideline: WP:COI. Your focus on this subject suggests you may have a strong connection to it of some sort. If this is the case, please read over the guideline and be especially careful with the issues I describe above. It can be challenging to weed out unintentional biases in writing about subjects that are important to us.

If you have any questions about providing permission for the image, please let me know. I'll be happy to help you. I'd appreciate it if you could give your attention to my concerns above soon. Ordinarily, I would tag an article in this case (not for deletion, but noting my concerns), but in light of your active efforts would prefer to hold off on that. :) Primarily, it needs to be neutralized and to show where its information is coming from. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:30, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for your response. :) I see that you've been working on my concerns with the article; I appreciate that. I've tagged "inline" a few specific remaining concerns. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. The references look okay to me; how are they showing wrong on your end? With respect to your letter of permission; watch your e-mail. If there are any problems, you should be notified soon. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:37, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's a matter of choice. If you want one column, you use {{reflist}}. If you want two columns, you use {{reflist|2}}. That keeps going; I'm not sure if there's a maximum cap. I know it works up to 5. :) I suspect anything over 3 columns is overkill, and most of the time two is plenty. I only use two if I've got a lot of refs, because I think the columns look silly if there's only one or two items in each. :D As to other things to do to the article, I've put an "orphan" tag on it which you can take care of or leave for somebody else, if you're not comfortable with that aspect of things. Basically, we try to keep Wikipedia a web of interconnected articles; ideally, every article should be linked to from at least one other. The only thing in "article space" to which the article is currently connected is Pedro Costa (disambiguation), and that doesn't count because it's just a list of articles about people named Pedro Costa. There's more information in the links included in the tag on the article.

By the way, please refer to me as Moonriddengirl only online. Since you've been cc'ed in the e-mail chain, you know me by another name now as well, but I prefer to keep anonymous on Wikipedia since sometimes people here are subject to harassment. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:05, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I'm glad to hear it. There's plenty of work to be done. :D Enjoy, and feel free to drop by my page if I can help you in any way. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:17, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When creating articles copy (do not use move)

PascalRoyal, Another thing, when you move a draft article from your user space, do not use the wikipedia move function. Copy it. You generated a #REDIRECT [[Pedro Costa (musician)]]. I have to assume a WP:BOT would at some time remove this invalid WP:REDIRECT from your user page (but can't be sure). Now just in case you were wondering what I was doing, I forgot to tell you to copy the live article (I assume it's most current), back to your draft page. If for some unholy reason it is deleted again, at least you have a copy with which you can work from. Argolin (talk) 08:45, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]