Talk:Michael Winkler

Untitled
Please keep, for a while at least. Perhaps change to a stub? Newbie or re Newbie disclaimer: I'd like to go over the Wikipedia guidelines, try things out in the sandbox, perhaps ask for guidance from Wikipedians, as well as check out Winkler's credentials before adding to the entry, but will be busy with work, family, etc. until after the holidays. My colleagues and students are aware of Winkler, but what they find about him tends to be confusing. Since they first hear about him in fields as diverse as art, poetry, mathematics, semiotics, human prehistory, evolution, and so on, potential interest in him doesn't seem too narrow, though its sparseness, again, makes an entry seem potentially more important. And when respected colleagues in different departments know something about him, it suggests he's worth attention, even though I'm not going to try to chase down documentation with Thanksgiving and exams making contradictory demands. My apologies if odd timing brings undue, and perhaps comic, chattiness into this note.

Thank you,

Scout MAP Scout MAP (talk) 05:02, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure from the descriptions what should be done to establish notability in this instance. One possible measure of notability is that the subject has been listed in this category for over a year and none of the many people who've checked the list has questioned its inclusion. So what does one do to establish the importance of an artist who has some adamant fans, but works in a highly esoteric literary and artistic genre that receives little out side confirmation. Perhaps there's a bit of irony in that I'm not the subject or a friend of his but would like to see him included here.

Scout MAP (talk) 10:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Scout MAP

Later addition: I don't know if the on-line references are sufficient to establish notability, and the guidlines I've encountered don't seem to permit print sources for varifiable third party validation. Okay. That's all I can do. If it's not enough, I think it would only be fair not to remove Winkler from the list of Concrete and Visual Poets along with my contribution. His name's been there for over a year. I can supply information on a number of people on this list, which seems to be what Wikipedia is asking for, though this comes largely from my print library. I only started with Winkler because he was at the end of the list, and the list itself shouldn't be mangled if I've been mistaken in trying to add to this section. When I made additions to other sections, such as beginning Bill Keith's entry, last year shortly after his death, I didn't have to have more than one or two on-line sources.

Scout MAP (talk) 11:46, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Scout MAP

Additional, next day, while waiting. Do well-trafficed blogs count as reliable third party validations? I don't know of any for Winkler, but there are others on the same list who could be documented by them. The people on the Concrete and Visual Poets List aren't likely to see much comment in current on-line newspapers, the only form of notability determiner I could find specified in the instructions.

Scout MAP (talk) 22:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)Scout MAP