User talk:50.74.57.218

Welcome to Wikipedia!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:


 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * Simplified Manual of Style
 * Intuitive guide to Wikipedia

You are welcome to continue editing without logging in, but you may want to consider  [ creating an account] . Doing so is free, requires no personal information, and provides several benefits such as the ability to create articles. For a full outline and explanation of the benefits that come with creating an account, please see this page. If you edit without a username, your IP address (50.74.57.218) is used to identify you instead.

In any case, I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your comments on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your IP address (or username if you're logged in) and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place  before the question on this page. Again, welcome! 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 18:37, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

National Academy members
Hi, there are two concerns with your going down an alphabetical list of academy members and adding this to biographical articles. One, you may sometimes be repeating information that is already included elsewhere in the article. More importantly, you're adding unsourced content. Please read WP:V and add the appropriate citations. Unsourced content, while it may be factual, is subject to removal. Thanks, JNW (talk) 15:44, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 26 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that some edits performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check these pages and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * On the Sergei Bongart page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=583415938 your edit] caused a missing references list (help | help with group references) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20Sergei Bongart Ask for help])
 * On the George Henry Bogert page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=583414826 your edit] caused a missing references list (help | help with group references) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20George Henry Bogert Ask for help])

Continued unreferenced edits
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. JNW (talk) 18:06, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Each addition needs to be sourced--you can use the Academy's website as a reference. For instance, here's a link to the page on 'A's . JNW (talk) 18:26, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Please consider registering
as an editor. I am a sculpture history editor and you are lighting up my watchlist like a Christmas tree - which is a good thing. However I do try to check up on edits made by unregistered editors, you might be surprised by the insidious level that some vandals will go to to do their thing. I notice that someone suggested that you provide references for your edits, which seem to all originate from one or two sources, and I second that emotion. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:20, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I wanted to make the same comment. Your edits would be exceedingly more helpful if you provided a source, particularly on articles that have already passed rigorous scrutiny to become approved as good or featured articles. Adding new information without a source, no matter how good the information, can be detrimental to the article. --Midnightdreary (talk) 21:19, 14 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I third this. Please considering registering and/or telling us your source for the National Academy Museum and School member edits. Valfontis (talk) 17:35, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your excellent contribution! You can find the source here .  It would be much appreciated if you could go back to each edit and add it.  Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)  Upon closer examination, it doesn't appear this editor has any intention of adding sources (or isn't reading their talk page). Magnolia677 (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Additions
Thanks for your additions to articles about women artists. Do you have sources for the information so that it's ensured the information can remain in the article?-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 18:40, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014
Hello, I'm CaroleHenson. I noticed that you made a change to an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/50.74.57.218  CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 18:45, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.


 * Posted a note at Administrator intervention against vandalism.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 18:49, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Please do not add or change content, as you did to Julian Scott, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. —Josh3580talk/hist 19:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did to Denise Scott Brown. This contravenes Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. —Josh3580talk/hist 19:16, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at George Segal (artist), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Josh3580talk/hist 19:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your last warning. The next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Joseph Severn, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. —Josh3580talk/hist 19:24, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for persistent vandalism. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Admr Boltz  19:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

National Academy of Design
You did not add any citations to your edits and there does not seem to be any other references. As Wikipedia needs to be verifiable, I undid your edits. Please feel free to restore them with a citation. Please see reliable sources, citations, and verifiability. Jim1138 (talk) 22:04, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Whether membership in the Academy is notable, or not, is debatable. Here is a possible citation for those who believe that the addition to an article is appropriate. (You can lift the "cite web" template from here):
 * Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 23:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 23:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Do you know if that citations would work for all of these: additions. I've been reverting some of the additions, but I could set up a AWB process to search/replace if the end of the string is always the same, and add the citations at the end.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 00:24, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Argh! I did a spot-check and some of the information is in synch, and sometimes the years are wrong.--<span style='text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD;'> CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 00:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * That might work as a first approximation, Carole. I've looked at two instances of this, one for Eliot Noyes and the other for Paul Sample. In the latter case, the editor used the wrong date. I substituted the language, "In 19XX he (she) was inducted into the National Academy.(citation)". I tailored the citation to lead to the page with the first letter of the last name, where one finds mention of the person in question. User:HopsonRoad 00:33, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, cool. Another option would it be better to leave off the year altogether. What do you think?--<span style='text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD;'> CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 00:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * FWIW, here is the way I did it. I couldn't find a source for second date, though I didn't look that hard. Valfontis (talk) 02:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Leaving off the date would seem to make the automation go smoothly. An editor interested in each page could then do the date thing. If you can leave an automated message in the Talk page and/or the edit remark, cueing editors to look at the date and modify it appropriately, that would be a useful option. Sincerely, User:HopsonRoad 02:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * It seems like the basic goal is to 1) resolve the text in the article and 2) notify the page watchers of the remedy. So it seems like the easiest option is to set up a find and replace routine and have the edit summary tell the story, letting the watchers know where to find the accurate data, per your link. He or she has done a lot of work and I was hoping to find an easy solution to meet these objectives rather than making changes to the article space + talk page. If you disagree, do you mind posting something on my talk page. AWB stops automatically if I have an incoming email. I just tried an example here, so you can see what I'm talking about.--<span style='text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD;'> CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 03:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If someone wants to do the spot-checking and add citations... there are still a lot of articles I've yet to process the bottom of and  on AWB.--<span style='text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD;'> CaroleHenson   ( talk ) 14:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Upd finished section, removed redundant phrase.--<span style='text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD;'> CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 16:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Carole! User:HopsonRoad 17:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Update National Academy of Design
The effort to update pertinent articles about National Academy of Design membership is a good one. It would be much better is to ensure that it is properly cited and doesn't appear to come from another, existing source. You may want to consider:
 * Adding the citation to the string you're adding, such as the one prepared by User:HopsonRoad, which is <-- using the correct date
 * Consider the approach you'd like to use to insert it in the middle of text that is cited. If it's inserted right in the middle of information that comes from another source, then there's a misrepresentation of what data came from the source.
 * Options might be:
 * 1) insert it in the middle of several cited sentences, but add the citation to the end of those sentences or
 * 2) insert the text and citation + using the existing citation for the sentence or sentences prior to the insertion point (i.e., if there's a text block with and existing citation, then: text< > + national academy info you're inserting with <<National Academy citation>> + text < >)


 * Where the information follows uncited information, please add at insertion point (i.e., citation needed + text about National Academy + National Academy citation).

I hope that makes sense. It's entirely likely that I could have been clearer, if so, and I can help, please let me know. Thanks!--<span style='text-shadow:0 -1px #DDD,1px 0 #DDD,0 1px #DDD,-1px 0 #DDD;'> CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 23:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)