User talk:Rogelionazar

Hello, Rogelionazar, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Rogelionazar, good luck, and have fun. Hoary (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Alberto Nicasio

Draft:Alberto Nicasio isn't yet ready to be an article, but it's very promising. Please see the changes I've made to the opening paragraph, and make similar changes throughout the article. The lists of exhibitions and awards should probably be shorn of what is less significant; all those that are listed, and all the claims of placement in museum collections, should be referenced. (See the analogous lists in for example the article David Goldblatt.) The list of "External links" is probably too long: don't include any that have also been used as references (I mean, in "<ref> ... </ref>"). Also, if some are there because you know they look usable and intend to use them later (or hope that somebody else will use them later), then remove these and list them instead in Draft talk:Alberto Nicasio. Happy editing! -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your kindness in stating that the entry is very promising. I am a total beginner in this Wikipedia business and right now I am on the steepest part of the learning curve. I will do as you suggest, although some of the changes will take time, particularly those regarding the sources for museum exhibitions. I have been able to see art gallery booklets and correspondence from museum curators, but the archives containing this information are in Argentina and I am not currently there. I do not know when will I be able to visit that country again due to current travel restrictions, but I will do my best to contact people there who could help gathering and scanning those sources. In any case, I do not know what would be appropriate procedure with these documents. As letters and gallery brochures are not exactly publications, I cannot list them as references. Perhaps should I upload them to Wikimedia? Any further suggestion will be most welcome. Thanks. Rogelionazar (talk) 14:44, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If brochures and correspondence are in archives that, at least in principle, are open to the public, then they may be cited. However, they're better avoided. If an exhibition, presence in a museum or gallery collection, or an award is noteworthy, then one would expect that it would have been written up in a newspaper or magazine article, in a museum's published account of its recent activities, or wherever. That said, I do realize that it's much harder to look for such material about, say, the 1960s within codices or microfiche (even when one has physical access to these) than to look for material about the 2010s via Google. If you're separated from the material by an ocean, harder still. However, the first two I happened to click (this and this) among the list of external links seem very usefully informative (though perhaps more or less open to contributions from the public; if they are indeed "user-generated", they can't be cited).

I suggest that you pause work on this draft until the matter of copyright of the artwork and photographs is sorted out. (See my new comment there.) But that shouldn't take long. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I continued your pattern of corrections throughout the article, in regards to the styles of referencing and the details of the references themselves. How could I overlook that the dates were in Spanish, I don't know, but rest assure I'll be paying more attention to that sort of details from now. I also deleted external links that were also listed as references. The rest of the issues you detected, however, will demand more time, maybe some days. I'm sending emails to people in Argentina who might help, and I'll be posting here about any new development. Thanks for all the input. Rogelionazar (talk) 01:33, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Links to draft articles

Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Facundo. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 09:03, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Perhaps you (Rogelionazar) are worried that the article-to-be would, on its birth, be what Wikipedia calls an "orphan" (an article to which no other article links), and would get an unsightly "orphan" template. If so, don't worry: it's normal for brand new articles to be orphans; one tries to make a few links to them during a short but unspecified period (a couple of days?) after they're born. -- Hoary (talk) 09:32, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ladies and/or gentlemen, please excuse my incompetence. It seems I am making mistake after mistake. Oh, what a shame! jaja. On the one hand, I am sorry that you have to bear the brunt of it, but on the other, I am very excited for how much I am learning about being a Wikipedist in the last few days. With regard to orphanhood, I was not really worried about it (in fact, the concept is new to me). I just happened to stumble upon this mention to the artist and thought that adding the link was the right thing to do. Never again! Thanks. Rogelionazar (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations: Alberto Nicasio is now an article. This of course means that you're free to link to it from other articles. Indeed, you're encouraged to do so (within reason). -- Hoary (talk) 02:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hoary for your guidance in this process and also for the improvements you made on the article. I will continue polishing this entry in the coming days. Regards. Rogelionazar (talk) 05:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good. You might do a little work on the bibliography. For example, what's now

Nicasio, Alberto. Capillas Coloniales de Córdoba. Ed. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, 1961.

should I think be something like

Nicasio, Alberto. Capillas coloniales de Córdoba: 12 xilografias = Colonial chapels of Córdoba: 12 woodcuts. [Córdoba, Argentina]: [Universidad Nacional de Córdoba], 1961. Twelve woodcuts, and a prologue by Marcelo Montes Pacheco. OCLC 47521772

-- Hoary (talk) 07:26, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just made some progress in the direction you indicated, and also followed the same principle in the case of the illustrated books. In parallel, I continue my research in order to find the required citations in the case of the permanent collections and exhibitions. I will try sending emails directly to the museums, though I do not expect to get much of this. Even if they do reply, you mentioned earlier that I cannot use private correspondence as a source unless it is made somehow publicly available. Anyway, I will keep with the detective work and will be posting here if I find something. Regards, Rogelionazar (talk) 04:03, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hoary, hello again. I decided that the best course of action was to temporarily delete all unsourced information from Alberto Nicasio's entry while I gather more information. This way, perhaps you could consider lifting the message you left in the Permanent collection section, regarding the lack of citations in some of the claims. Thanks for your time. Regards, Rogelionazar (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alberto Nicasio has been accepted

Alberto Nicasio, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Hoary (talk) 02:23, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]