Talk:Susanna Roxman

Project tag
I don't feel that the Swedish project is relevant here. Roxman isn't a Swedish writer. She was born in Stockholm, but her family and surname are Scottish. She writes in English, and, as far as I know, lives in the UK. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 21:56, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Very clearly within the projects' coverage. Born in Sweden, wrote her Ph.D. thesis at Gothenburg University, and has published also in Swedish. Tomas e (talk) 21:06, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Can't say I agree. Her family isn't Swedish, and she writes in English. And I think she lives in Britain. To pigeonhole her as a Swedish writer would be nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 21:48, 1 August 2010 (UTC) Smilesofasummernight (talk) 22:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that the Swedish project is perfectly valid here. I am putting the Swedish project back on and also putting the UK project on. Having a project on the page does not imply exclusivity and does not "pigeonhole" any article. Project tags simply mean that certain projects care about the format and information on the articles. Tomas e was correct. She has strong ties to Sweden, so put in Sweden project. She has strong ties to UK, so put in UK project. It's not one or the other. Also added the poetry project. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 22:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree about the UK project. I´m afraid I still don´t see the relevance of the Sweden project. Roxman isn´t a Swedish writer, and I´m not sure that I would (or that she would) describe her ties to Sweden as strong. It so happens that she was born in Stockholm. She isn´t herself Swedish, though. (Roxman is a Scottish name.) As for the poetry project, yes! That´s a very suitable idea, of course. But why only low importance? I see Roxman as a poet first. smilesofasummernight  Smilesofasummernight (talk) 21:55, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * She did live a good bit of her life there and went to school there. She published several things in Swedish and did some things for Swedish Radio. The article even says so. The best course of action, if you still disagree, would be to ask the Sweden WikiProject to determine whether they want to keep this in their list of articles covered. If so, then they are perfectly free to put whatever article they want under their care as well. We cannot tell them not to cover it. Whether an article is covered by any certain project or not is not based on the importance to the article subject really, but based on what that WikiProject feels they want to cover. Similarly, in regards to the poetry wikiproject tag, the class and importance is not about how important "poetry" is to Roxman (or whatever the article subject would be), but how important that article is to the project. With so many poet articles out there, a low importance rating would be sufficient to start. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 00:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, my problem here is that I happen to know (having corresponded with her occasionally) that Roxman has fought very hard for years to avoid the label "Swedish writer". And, as a matter of fact, she isn´t a Swedish writer -- most people would surely assume that this meant that she writes in Swedish, which wouldn´t be true. Roxman never writes any poetry in Swedish. She has told me that she is very anxious that people shouldn´t think that her (justly celebrated) poems are translations, which, of course, is never the case. Her being part of the Sweden project could, for this reason, be seen as misleading. (Even though there would be the British project to counterbalance it.) When I asked about the (initial) low-importance rating of her as part of the poetry project (if I understood this correctly), I didn´t mean that this, that, or the other would be important to Roxman herself. I meant that she is a well known, widely published poet. But you seem to imply that she may eventually "move up" a bit. smilesofasummernight  Smilesofasummernight (talk) 14:54, 7 April 2012 (UTC)Smilesofasummernight (talk) 13:06, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Contested speedy deletion of image
The speedy deletion of the page (meaning the photo) is contested. It has got a licence, so there was no reason to remove it. Smilesofasummernight (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Question about footnotes tag
Sorry, I don´t quite understand the piece of criticism -- that inline citations are lacking. Surely one shouldn´t use footnotes? This isn´t an academic text, but meant for everybody. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 21:39, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, yes, we are supposed to use footnotes so users can verify the information put in. Otherwise anyone can claim anything. Please see WP:VERIFY and WP:CITE for more information about the need to have verifiable sources and the way to cite information in articles. Doesn't have to be a doctoral thesis, but needs to be done like a well-cited and well-written essay. Plus, the references given are not very specific at all. General pointing to a book or website is not good enough. Those references did not actually link to the sources, anyway, but just had web addresses written without http. If there is a specific link to the information that would be preferable. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 22:03, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, JoannaSerah. Many articles here don´t have footnotes, so I assumed it wasn´t necessary. It isn´t always possible to add links -- some sources are printed, not on-line. I must say I think it´s a pity that the photo now is smaller than before. Could we enlarge it a bit perhaps? Smilesofasummernight (talk) 09:52, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's true. Not all sources are online sources and that is perfectly fine. If they are cited well, (i.e. have the title, author, page number, etc.) then that's ok. Online sources are easier to check often, but not absolutely necessary. I know there are other articles out there that don't have all the proper (or properly formatted) sources, but those will be gotten around to eventually. As for the image size, I just updated that. The default is 250px, I changed it to 300px. That should be big enough. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 00:37, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for enlarging the picture. I do think it looks nicer this way. smilesofasummernight  Smilesofasummernight (talk) 14:54, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Ibid & project importance
I have removed the "Ibid." Is there anything else? smilesofasummernightSmilesofasummernight (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, I´m curious about the "importance" rating. How is the importance category for any article chosen, in the context of a WikiProject? What are the criteria? smilesofasummernightSmilesofasummernight (talk) 13:35, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
 * For the ibid tag, I see you have corrected some of that, but the references & notes section are redundant and need to be put in a better Wikipedia reference format. I can work on that. As far as the importance tags for the Wikiprojects, those are generally assessed by people who are active in the specific Wikiprojects. It has to do with how important or what priority the article has to that project. It is not really a statement of the overall "importance" or popularity of any person, though, sometimes, it can be. Specific criteria could vary by Wikiproject, although much of it is subjective. It is generally up to the active participants to decide what they want to focus on. You could always go to the talk page of whatever Wikiproject and ask for an article reassessment of class and/or importance, if you feel it necessary. They can decide whether to upgrade it or not. That would be the best route, because unilaterally raising the importance level of the article would just be puffery/promotion. Generally speaking, I would say most things on Wikipedia are "low" priority to whatever project. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 17:32, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

External links/References
I reworked the page to use a more standard referencing format. Took out mentions/links to Goodreads, open library, verse daily. Those are not really considered reliable sources. Open source sites like that are generally not accepted. The other refs covered what was there; mostly anyway. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 18:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi again, JoannaSerah

Was trying to make some alterations in the article, but someone else (you perhaps) was editing the article at about the same time, so I´d prefer to come back later. I´d like to say, though, that I´m grateful for your explaining about the "importance" tags.

Much of your editing of the article as a whole is helpful. I didn´t know that Open Library and the rest aren´t considered good sources. I was a little surprised to find the Open Library mentioned, in such unflattering terms, as that always seemed to me so sober. But perhaps that isn´t so. I don´t have much experience as for editing Wikipedia articles; have only done it in a few other cases, and mostly minor edits.Smilesofasummernight (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Questions about content taken out and citing
I disagree about the "gifted child" bit -- isn´t it rather interesting to see what becomes of a gifted child? And, especially, I wish to keep the references to the Edinburgh Festival. That is by far the best known arts festival, and it´s an honour for a writer to be invited to a reading there -- in the case of Susanna Roxman, this has happened three times. Surely, seeing that she is a poet, this kind of honour is relevant. That you don´t wish those book fairs to be mentioned is another matter, and acceptable. As for Prairie Schooner, Roxman has contributed at least three times to that famous magazine, so the note is a little misleading. The [4], indicating the note here, is in the wrong place, but I don´t know how to edit this. I have been trying to add sources concerning Roxman´s journalism; will return to that; or you could add these two: www.roxman.info, as well as Poesin hos Forfattarcentrum Syd.Smilesofasummernight (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * To me, stating she was a gifted child is questionable as to the need of being listed here. I can accept the Edinburgh Festival a notable, yes. I just didn't think a list of poetry readings really belonged and definitely not in the lead paragraph. As far as the cite for Prairie Schooner, the citation is not really in the wrong place as that cite covers the four journals in that list. The author bio on that reference states "Prairie Schooner, Spoon River Poetry Re-view, Crab Orchard Review, Cimarron Review." It didn't state Visions International, so I couldn't put it at the very end of the list, otherwise I would have. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 16:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your help. Many of your comments and suggestions have been helpful. Glad you accept the reference to the Edinburgh Festival. I realize now that the numeral I thought was in the wrong place is in fact in the right place -- sorry. Also, I didn´t at first realize that the reference is to the bio, rather than Roxman´s own work, in that issue of Prairie Schooner. I have tried to add some notes, but can´t do them as nicely as you can. Perhaps you´ll have the time to put the numerals within square brackets -- I don´t seem to be able to. Also, the notes should of course be in the proper places on the list of notes. I have contacted the National Radio in Sweden about Roxman´s work -- it might be mentioned on the site of the National Radio, or somewhere. I´m told she wrote more than 100 pieces on the arts for the National Radio there. All best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 14:57, 2 October 2012 (UTC) smilesofasummernightSmilesofasummernight (talk) 15:00, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Already taking up enough space here. :) Replying to this question about footnotes on your talk page. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 20:21, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, JoannaSerah! I suppose you have seen I have added references and a link or two. I have tried to extend the first reference (note), but don´t seem to be able to. I don´t quite see why it needs to be extended, but anyway.Smilesofasummernight (talk) 13:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Have spent 3 whole evenings now trying to add a second photo to the article about Susanna Roxman. It was difficult enough to add the first one. As for the second, it just doesn't work. At one point another but rather similar picture appeared instead of the chosen one. There is no problem with the photo as such, as it's uncopyrighted, and my own work anyway. I can't make the photo "take", or stick. Its code: P4240035.JPG

The name of this photo: Susanna Roxman. Kensington Gardens.

Grateful for some help! User:Smilesofasummernight 17 January 2015 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 21:49, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Becky Sayles,

Thanks for your help. Would it be possible for you to help me also by adding a second photo to the article? Please see my message here 17 January 2015. The information about the second photo is (wrongly; it's my fault) just below the first photo. I've spent three evenings trying to transfer the second photo as such (not just information about the second photo) to this Wikipedia article. I'd be very grateful indeed for some help. The photo is my own work, and uncopyrighted. smilesofasummernight — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 20:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi again,

Have today got some much needed help to add a second photo to the article on Susanna Roxman. Also, the information that was in the wrong place (just below the first photo) has been deleted.

smilesofasummernight — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smilesofasummernight (talk • contribs) 15:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)