Talk:Pickard China/Archives/2011

NPOV
See: WP:NPOV and use a more encyclopedic approach for this article. The collectors site can be listed, however please be careful as the article may be marked for speedy deletion as an advertisement. Any help on clean-up will be appreciated - see WP:MOS. Addition of history will help to improve the article.Gmcbjames (talk) 05:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Content removed
Moved from User talk:Gmcbjames


 * James, I know you're trying to be efficient and helpful, but the changes you just made to the Pickard China page undid the hard work of several contributors, me included.


 * The content you removed was provided as a service after many requests for better information about collecting the china. What you called advertising refers to a book that is 15 years old, considered the "bible" for information about Pickard China, and it is by no means an advertisement. Rather, the information about the collectors club and the book is intended to assist the dozens of Pickard china owners who have sought information about Pickard and requested the information you removed.


 * Please consult me before you do this kind of rewrite again. Your rationale seems rather arbitrary and the result is not appreciated.


 * I am doing you the courtesy of asking you to remove your own edits before I do. Please respect our efforts to help amateur collectors and owners of Pickard china. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digidanno (talk • contribs) 23:24, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


 * My intent is to create a good encyclopedic article on and about Pickard China, see WP:WWIN. Pickard China did not have a talk page, and hence no discussion on the direction of this article. Also, remember: "Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning that anyone can edit any unprotected page and improve articles immediately for all readers" WP:HOW. The article did not have a neutral point of view WP:NPOV.  Unfortunately, the article as written read as an advertisement for the Pickard China company and the Pickard collector's club, not an encyclopedic article.


 * Regarding the Pickard China book, I agree of the importance, however it should be used as a citation source. If the book is mentioned in the reference section, then it is discouraged from being added to a section such as "For further reading."  For layout guidelines, see WP:LAYOUT and WP:MOS (Manual of Style).  I imagined the book would be heavily cited, so I did not add a further reading section to include the book.  In the section "External links," guidelines indicate a web site should only be listed once.  So to have people know there is valuable information on the web site add a note to the external link such as "for reference on china marks, and ...."


 * Hopefully these comments will help in producing a good article and prevent the article from receiving tags (see WP:TEMP) regarding what I have discussed, as well as in my comments in the edit summaries. I look forward to collaborating on this article, as Pickard China needs a great article.  BTW, maybe Kelly Wearstler's design work for Pickard China would be a great addition.  Images, also would contribute to the article. (see WP:IMAGES).Gmcbjames (talk) 01:10, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Okay, James, points noted and observed. Stet, you win. I have neither time nor interest for taking it further. Thanks for dusting off the piece and making it fit the your encyclopedic form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Digidanno (talk • contribs) 01:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Your collaboration is important to make this article twinkle proof. My intent was not to discourage you, and I do hope you will continue to collaborate on this article. Your input will help make this article a good article or a featured article.  I would have cited the Pickard book for in-line citations, however I couldn't find my copy until now.  I will put in a section "Further reading" with the book for now, and if the book is cited in the body of the text then remove the section.  Usually citations are only needed if anyone disputes a fact - though to be twinkle proofed, articles should have citations in-line.  And thank you for your kind comment regarding "dusting off the piece."  Everyone's help is needed to make this article shine.Gmcbjames (talk) 02:52, 4 August 2011 (UTC)