Talk:Miguel Rosales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Excessive External Links[edit]

There seems to be an excessive list of external links. I don't know which ones are important or not. I would recommend an interested editor should par down the list to few (5-10). If you plan to do this please let me know here otherwise sometime next week I will probably just use a ax on all of them let it start over. XFEM Skier (talk) 15:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reads like a resume[edit]

The article is now tagged as such. While Rosales is clearly notable, the article is completely lacking in references to third-party WP:RS. There is no discussion or critical evaluation of his work, just a listing of awards and projects. Rosales' background, training, and design philosophy are absent. The article is quite boring, and a more up-to-date version of his resume can probably be found on his website, if that's all one wants. There's plenty of room for improvement. Reify-tech (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article has had some modest improvements in the past year, but there's still ample room for improvement. Now that the Beacon Hill Times has its own website [1], its articles on Rosales' local work near downtown Boston can be searched and referenced online. His work has also been covered in the Boston Globe, Boston Herald, Boston Magazine, and other local publications. A websearch on "miguel rosales bridges reviews" turns up a number of articles in national and international media. There are plenty of third-party WP:RS to add solid references to the article.
It would be useful to include more third-party reviews and commentary on his work. Although most of it is positive, constructive negative criticism will help balance the article's coverage. More coverage of Rosales' background, training, and design philosophy would be helpful, if reliable sources can be found. His combination of aesthetics backed by fundamental structural engineering, plus an interest in community participation, is still unfortunately rare in the design of major public works. Reify-tech (talk) 18:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]