Talk:Jon Macy

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2019 and 3 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Angeldrew19. Peer reviewers: Freakyforwiki.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
I recommend the following be edited toward more present language:

From: "His work was known for its dark surreal motifs as Macy often combined erotically charged images with hallucination and death."

To: "These stories contain dark and surreal motifs, combining eroticism with hallucination and death, which remain a signature within nearly all Macy's personal works." Volpane (talk) 16:31, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * This basically appears to have been done a while back. Is there a reference associated with this kind of statement? If so, feel free to place it in the article as well, which, in general, needs some more citations for sure. Guy1890 (talk) 01:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I think the original was written to explain what is unique to Mr. Macy's work. I could sight various review of his works.Volpane (talk) 00:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

I've managed to cite most everything that has a citation request, save his birth date which I have no idea where to get a valid reference, but all from web links. I hope the world cat links are valid reference as I can't think of any other way to cite this. Please talk to me if you find anything unreasonable. Volpane (talk) 00:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Broken Link/Questionable Citation
Citation 5 link to the The Gay Comix/Comics Index appears to be broken, as it results in a Not Found error message. The Optical Sloth blog post in citation 9 is also a little slim, it doesn’t go into detail about Macy’s work in a way that adds much information or context, other than the fact it mentions the collaboration with Sina Evil, which is already cited by linking to the book itself. It also doesn’t seem to be a particularly credible source, it kind of seems more like a personal review blog. I can’t seem to find any additional information on the editor, author or website at large that would determine their credibility. Doing this evaluation for a class, hope I don’t step on anyone’s toes, no idea what I'm doing. Chadsaway (talk) 08:57, 11 February 2017 (UTC)chadsaway
 * The needed quality of the citation depends a bit on what information is being cited. If it's a simple matter of "he did this story in that publication" that's practically a citation itself: you could look up that publication and see if the story is there. (It doesn't have to be online to be verifiable.) A link to something online that says so is nice, but not important to have. (And if necessary, a link to archive.org will often fix broken links like this.) Similarly, if the fact being cited is a simple non-controversial matter of "he did work with this person" (rather than something more sensational like "he was in a relationship with this person" or "he was in a dispute with them") a random third party with no motive to make stuff up is good enough to establish that the editor isn't making stuff up. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2017 (UTC)