User talk:Robert.johnson27453

Welcome!

Hello, Robert.johnson27453, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Max Cramer, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Cssiitcic (talk) 04:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Max Cramer

The article Max Cramer has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Cssiitcic (talk) 04:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC) Max Cramer died on 3 August 2010 Robert.johnson27453 (talk) 05:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Robert.johnson27453[reply]

Template:Did you know nominations/Freycinet Map of 1811

Hello, Robert.johnson27453. Thank you for writing up the article Freycinet Map of 1811. I've nominated it to appear in the "Did you know...?" (DYK) section on Wikipedia's MainPage. You can see the nomination here. If you're interested in having your work showcased as part of DYK, please respond to reviewers' comments here (if any). Per DYK rules, the article must be properly referenced and every paragraph must have at least one footnote. Can you put in more footnotes, please? Many thanks. Happy editing. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 04:45, 20 February 2012 (UTC) Thanks for your kind nomination. I think there are sufficient footnotes, references and links providing comprehensive information on context, adding further footnotes would just be gratuitous. Robert.johnson27453 (talk) 05:55, 2 April 2012 (UTC)Robert.johnson27453[reply]

Reliable source guidelines re. Rupert Gerritsen publications

Hi Robert, I notice that you've added material in several different articles citing works by Rupert Gerritsen. I have some concerns over whether these works meet Wikipedia's sourcing guidelines and I've started a discussion here. You're welcome to participate in that discussion. --GenericBob (talk) 10:16, 3 April 2012 (UTC) Hi GenericBob, I am citing numerous authors and authorities of course in articles and updates. Am trying to bring to bear the most recent research and developments relevant to the matters addressed. Gerritsen seems to have a reputable track record in publishing, the publishers you mention are reputable publishers as far as I know, these source are cited elsewhere and the publications have ISSNs and ISBNs. Robert.johnson27453 (talk) 05:46, 4 April 2012 (UTC)Robert.johnson27453[reply]

ISSNs and ISBNs don't have much bearing on whether a source is considered reliable; one of the things that does matter is whether the material has been vetted by somebody other than the author. (I'm simplifying greatly, see WP:RS for more specific discussions). Self-published material doesn't usually qualify, and that includes the situation where a third party publishes material but doesn't apply critical oversight (e.g. publish on demand services).

In the case of Batavia Online Press - I can't find anything about them except in connection to Gerritsen, and some of their publications (of his work) appear to list his personal webpage as their contact point, so it looks to me as if this is simply an imprint for his own self-published work. A couple of the other publishers involved do have more of a visible presence, but it's not clear to me whether they apply peer review or just publish on demand. At the other end, Hydrographic Journal is a fairly solid source; it's the stuff in the middle I'm concerned about. If you can provide more information about those publishers, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Rupert_Gerritsen.2C_Batavia_Online_Publishing.2C_Archaeopress.2C_Hydrographic_Journal.2C_Fremantle_Arts_Centre_Press would be a good place to do that. Cheers - ----~~

Archaeopress publish British Archaeological Reports, probably one of the most eminent archaeological publishers in the world, Fremantle Art Centre Press, now Fremantle Press are a long-standing publisher of fiction and non-fiction, Hydrographic Journal is a learned journal produced by International Federation of Hydrographic Societes, Batavia Online Publishing is a new e-publisher. Robert.johnson27453 (talk) 05:22, 5 April 2012 (UTC)robert.johnson27453 Looking at talk page re Reliable Sources, obviously the Batavia Online publication and information based on that is contentious so have removed from History of Agriculture.Robert.johnson27453 (talk) 07:00, 5 April 2012 (UTC)robert.johnson27453[reply]