Talk:Scarlett Raven

paraphrase
Much of this article is a very close paraphrase of the subject's website. So much so that it is a borderline nomination for a copyvio speedy. The formatting needs work, the tone needs work as it reads very much as a puff piece (not surprising considering where a lot of it has been copied from). Please address these issues before removing the tags. Thank you.   Harry    Let us have speaks |undefinedundefined 09:13, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * What actual facts are you disputing about the subject. There are multiple citations verifying the work of the individual and the information contained within the article.


 * The article does not read like an advert and if you "think" it does be explicit about which parts so they can be edited accordingly.


 * What are your specific issues with the formatting and tone. It's unhelpful and lazy to call an article a puff piece and raise multiple issues without constructively contributing to it's refinement.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnyh31 (talk • contribs) 10:00, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The main issue is that large parts of it have been copied wholesale from Raven's website (with slight paraphrasing such as "She" instead of "I"). That sets the tone for the whole article.


 * There are sections like "AR strips away the layers of her paintings to reveal Scarlett’s creative journey beneath: the thought processes, the paint strokes, the inspiration, the effort, the musings, the mistakes. It is a place where digital meets analogue. Where paint collaborates with pixels. And Scarlett is its premier exponent: the World’s First Augmented Reality Fine Artist.[4] They say a picture paints a thousand words. Under the surface of Scarlett’s AR paintings are tens of thousands of other images, overlaid and layered with thought and inspiration. A thousand words doesn’t begin to cover it." Pure puffery copied straight from her website. Ditto this: "Mixing Paint With Pixels. Augmentism allows Scarlett to expose the layers of the physical and mental processes in her work. For Scarlett, painting is catharsis. She explores the darkest and most purest aspects of her being."


 * Need I go on? I think the problems are pretty obvious to anyone who has time to fix it which I don't.   Harry    Let us have speaks |undefinedundefined 10:12, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The initial quote you reference is an apt description of what Raven's paintings do, you can physically see this is what's occurring. If you have time, you can learn this is the case by using the app.


 * "AR strips away the layers of her paintings to reveal Scarlett’s creative journey beneath: the thought processes, the paint strokes, the inspiration, the effort, the musings, the mistakes"


 * Thank you for finally making clear your issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnyh31 (talk • contribs) 10:28, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The problem is the article isn't encyclopedic (which very few articles which are copied wholesale are). You need to read carefully the links in the welcome message on your talk page, especially respecting copyrights (do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites) and maintaining a neutral point of view, one of Wikipedia's core policies. As stated in the tags on the article, it does not conform to both of those policies. I thought the tags spoke for themselves, especially if you follow the links.   Harry    Let us have speaks |undefinedundefined 10:34, 9 August 2016 (UTC)


 * A few points on why you persist to reinstate tags that have been addressed. Even if you don't have time, there are people who do and are prepared to work to ensure Raven has a clean page that objectively informs the world about her and her work.


 * The neutrality of this article is disputed. (August 2016) No one is saying Raven is the best artist in the world. The article states verifiable facts about her work using a range of citations. What's your issue here?
 * This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. (August 2016) Please outline explicitly what you think reads like an advert?? Nothing is saying buy here or you must go to her exhibition.
 * This article may be in need of reorganization to comply with Wikipedia's layout guidelines. (August 2016) What needs re-organising in your view?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnyh31 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * As I have said, this article needs a complete rewrite, not just tinkering. Any article that relies so heavily on the subject's website can't possibly be neutral. You (or someone with expertise and time I don't have) needs to start again and rewrite the article in your own words. I have done a bit of reorganising (some of which you have undone) but the structure of the article needs improving. As I have said to you before, please read the articles that are linked from your Talk Page about how Wikipedia works and how to create an article. There are also links to places you can go for help if you have questions. There is no doubts Raven is notable, but the article in it's current form does not meet Wikipedia standards.   Harry    Let us have speaks |undefinedundefined 18:07, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Editing this article
I am concerned about the two new accounts that have been created and have so far only edited this article. I wonder if you could confirm whether you have any association with each other and/or with Scarlett Raven.

Also, as I have said before, this article needs a complete rewrite to comply with Wikipedia standards. A bit or rewriting here and there is not enough.

Thanks.   Harry    Let us have speaks |undefinedundefined 17:16, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Five years later, is it fixed now? It would be nice to know how reliable this article is. 2.31.162.49 (talk) 21:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It could be updated, she has done many more exhibitions Alexanderkowal (talk) 17:17, 16 October 2023 (UTC)