User talk:Agilmer1/sandbox

draft comments
Hi I'm providing online support for your class at UMD and I have a few comments on your draft Please let me know if you have any questions or need a hand with anything. Thanks for your work so far. Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:16, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I have some sourcing suggestions:
 * ISBN 0300067976 (p. 151) goes into detail about Whiten's art in the 70s.
 * As does this journal article (though I don't have online access to it).
 * ISBN 9780773564732 has a chapter devoted to Whiten
 * I think you'll find a lot of sources at the "bibliography" section of your first link (the susan hobbes gallery).
 * I would take a look at Janise Yntema as it is a fairly good example of what an article like this will should look like. Of note, terms like "Birmingham" should be wikilinked (Birmingham)
 * I think a comprehensive list of exhibitions is probably not very valuable to an article like this. Put yourself in the shoes of a reader looking to find a bit of information about Whiten. When you come to her wikipedia page, what would you expect to see? I would expect a summary of her work and her biography as well as pointers to references and more comprehensive information elsewhere. Lists like this can make the article difficult to navigate. I would recommend you remove the list entirely.
 * "...is a renown [sic] Canadian sculptor" On wikipedia we want to avoid making claims like "so and so is a famous painter" or "person Y is a ground-breaking filmmaker" as they're fundamentally statements of opinion and wikipedia tries very hard to be as neutral as possible. If we have a source which establishes her renown, there are ways to incorporate it, but I don't see your first source supporting that claim (just the claim that she's a sculptor).
 * The references section is normally a section heading (inserted as == References == into the article above the reference list).


 * I made a few edits, like adding wikilinks and a "References" section. The citations were not really formatted, so I formatted the first one in a template as an example and then started templates for the other sources so that the accessdate fields that need to be completed are identified. If you have more than one use of the same source, you can name the first use - with the full citation information with a name, like and each subsequent use just needs a tag like.


 * Generally, I wouldn't use a gallery as a source of information, because they have a biased stance, but it may be that this was considered ok for this course.


 * It would be nice to see the segue between her being born in England and being considered a Canadian - I'm guessing that her family moved to Canada when she was young, perhaps with the end of World War II. Perhaps one of her parents was Canadian?


 * I totally agree about the exhibitions information, it overwhelms the article. I think it would make sense to roll the information into 2-6 sentences, such naming the countries where she's had her works exhibited and notable and/or oft-used venues.-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 08:52, 10 November 2014 (UTC)