Talk:Manuel de Cendoya

Duplication and disagreements
This article duplicates material and sometimes disagrees with the Castillo de San Marcos article. Language needs to be improved. PAR (talk) 19:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup tags
Kudos for you all who have been working on this article (e.g. ). We need more of these topics covered in WP. Let me explain my suggestions and requests. The English quality tag should be self-explanatory. Even an online grammar software would make a world of a difference. The tag about focusing on Cendoya's life is more specifically about the need of bringing other aspects of his life to bear on this article. The reader should receive from a biography a more rounded picture of his life as a human being not only as a castle builder and manager. And even this aspect of his life (here occupying most of the space), should be made relevant to his bio. Castles and their constructions should have their own articles (though I noticed a slow but chronic edit-warring that might hinder progress). Thanks Rosario (talk) 06:15, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not to be a smartass, but it's easy to tag articles, and a lot of work to clean up those as poorly written as this one was when I started on it. I invite the two editors who will likely even read this talk page to jump in and help. What about you, Rabanorosario? Could you add some material?
 * Anyone who's looking for articles laden with broken, often unintelligible English, unreliable sources, and frequent misinterpretation of referenced texts need only take a look at the contributions page of the editor who created it to find a mountain of labor to be done on all 282 (!) of the articles he's created (some deleted). Carlstak (talk) 13:36, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The construction of the strengths (specially the Castillo de San Marcos) is the main thing he made in Florida, during his term. For that reason, these events must be collected in the article (otherwise, we would have little information about its administration in Florida). On the other hand, more aspects of his life could be of utility, but the found sources were limited, basically, to his Florida's administration (particularly, his contribution in the construction of Castillo).--Isinbill (talk) 13:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * , I am surprised by your defensive attitude. Unfortunately, it seems it is becoming far too frequent around here. If I had intended drive-by tagging (WP:DRIVEBY), I would not have taken the time to explain the reasons. I would not have congratulated you, in particular. I saw what you have done, and I told you we need more of you. I think you need to reserve your feisty demeanor (smart-ass, as you said?), for people you know who deserve it. I was not pontificating when I placed those tags there. I was simply following the expectations embedded in the WP principles that call for collaboration, but since online conversations are incomplete, you could have read my intentions wrong. Thank goodness WP also has the (WP:AGF) code. If I took the time to read "your" article attentively it was because I care and I am grateful.
 * Defensive? Not at all. It wasn't clear to me that you intended to contribute to the article, and I was surprised that you focused on the fact that the article had shortcomings rather than addressing some of them yourself, by actually making some of the changes you suggest. Perhaps you can collaborate with u|Isinbill to improve the quality of material he wants to contribute, as he has a particular interest in Florida's Spanish history (as do I; I live in St. Augustine). His fact-checking is often off the mark, and he's shown a penchant (at least in the past) for adding copy and pasted text from sources without attribution. Also, he was until recently under the mistaken impression that translated text was not subject to copyright, and that it was okay to quote sources in articles by italicizing the quotations (also without attribution) rather than using quotation marks. He has been disabused of those notions by an administrator. I've rewritten, fact-checked, and removed and added sources on several of the articles he's created, but there is much work to be done to improve the rest, including rooting out copyvios and errors of fact. You would probably find subjects of interest to yourself among his submissions. Carlstak (talk) 23:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I will certainly add some material, but I should get a sense of the directions the contributors want to take it. In other words, what are the interests of the consensus, the limitations of the project and how your plans may link to my interests. I would love to hear what are these challenges and expectations. Still, my contributions would have to be more modest than yours-- limited time in the non-digital world.
 * , mi lengua favorita es mi español materno, y no creo que escribirlo aquí, de vez en cuando, sea algun problema. I could cite my experience with publishing academic pieces, but I rather use WP guidelines. And they clearly say that it does not matter if Cendoya's best-known contribution to humanity was his castle construction, the article should still focus on his life. And, though it would help to find more sources, this specific guideline could yet be followed even with the source that you currently have. It is all about pointing it to his bio. Simply, that the reader should sense that Cendoya is the article's focal point. Also, secondary sources that explain the times and spaces he inhabited should help in re-creating (as much as possible) his world.
 * Regardless, the concern about the quality of the written English should come first. It is urgent. You are building the precedents of future works about the Latino American past in Wikipedia. It will come a time when your contributions will pose front and center. So, you want them to read well. Moreover, le enseñaría a los de habla inglesa, que nosotros podemos esribir en su idioma tan bien como ellos. I would too find it difficult to accept a badly written article in the Spanish Wikipedia... But we can work together, asking for feedback and collaborating toward this goal. Again, no offense intended with the tags. Rosario (talk) 16:13, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Gracias por tu deseo de ayudarme a mejorar los artículos. I consider it very important that my articles are understood by the users of Wikipedia and I would be delighted if we cooperate together in the articles to improve the level of English of them. I think "my" items may be better understood by Spanish-speakers (with knowledge of English language) than by English-speakers (some sentences follow the word order in Spanish (although I changed some of them, thank my improvement in the English language), I also get confused some words because in Spanish mean the same think (per example: "among" and "between" are "entre" in Spanish), etc.). So I have troubles with English language. (and again, thank for you help!)--Isinbill (talk) 21:11, 16 December 2015 (UTC)