User talk:Cwtyler

Italian Renaissance painting
Since you are a new editor, I'm dropping you a note to explain the reversion of your edits. Some of the articles on Wikipedia are what one would call "generic articles. ie they take a vast subject and attempt to contain and explain it within the compass of a single small article. Italian Renaissance painting is one of those vast subjects. I wrote it, and I had to be very selective with the information provided and the works illustrated. Because the article could not be too long, I added an extension which talks more about themes, style etc, and is linked to the parent article, along with all the separate articles on particular individuals.

It often happens that people come along with an artist or a subject that is of particular interest and they perceive that it has not been fully covered in the parent article. The fact is there is simply no room for four mentions of Masolino in that article, not unless his work can be perceived as having the impact of Giotto, Massaccio, Piero della Francesca and Leonardo. They are mentioned as the definitive artists of their age, the creators of the movement in which lesser artists like Masolino were lifted up and carried along. There are twenty or more artists that could be named in the intro, and again in the sentence that talks about the "serendipidous presence" of truly great artists in the city of Florence during that period. Masolino gets coverage in the article at the point at which the Brancacci Chapel is discussed. His name is linked there to his biography. Other artists who are named within the two articles but not used in the intro or the list of "the greatest" are Domenico and Davide Ghirlandaio, the Pollaiuoli, Filippo and Filippino Lippi, Perugino, Boltraffio, del Castagno etc etc.

When you are editting, you need to look at the article as a whole. It isn't a matter of putting in every single piece of data, but choosing how relevant the data is to the overall topic, where is the best place for the data within the article and how best to express the info so that it fits.

I'll give you an example. There is an article called Cathedral. That article attempts to sum up what a cathedral is, how cathedrals developed historically, how they function and who the personel who run them are, what generally happens there and how they fit into society. That is an awful lot of info. There is simply no room to discuss the architecture of cathedrals in detail, even though this interests a lot of people. Why isn't it done? Because a cathedral can be as big and grand as St Paul's, London, or as tiny as the Pro Cathedral of St Michael's, Wollongong which seats 150 people at a very tight squeeze. They are equally relevant to the topic of "cathedral". The pictures have been chosen to illustrate function and diversity, not grandeur.

However, every person on this planet has a favourite cathedral and every one of them (it seems) wants to cram a photo of it into that one little article, or criticise the fact that there are pictures of buildings which are not architecturally great or which illustrate something that doesn't happen at their cathedral. The pictures of people's favourites were swamping the article, and in the end, they were all deleted, except a few.

I don't want to discourage you from editting, quite the reverse. I am writing this to give you some guidelines about good editting.

There is a small rule to remember which often takes in new editors. American articles, and many general articles are in American English. British, Commonwealth and many European articles are in British English. Don't go changing them either way, unless you have noticed a discrepancy eg if an English editor writing about Andy Warhol uses "colour" rather than "color", this should be corrected in line with the rest of the article. Some generic articles state on the talk page that they are in British/US English and ought not be changed. Usually it is quite straight forward what spelling convention should be used.

Happy editting!

Disambiguation link notification for March 9
Hi. When you recently edited Solar flare, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Plasma (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:17, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Masolino
Thanks for the extended commentary on my small edit. The disregard of Masolino and the elevation of his pupil, Masaccio (sic) to fame and glory is the greatest miscarriage of art historical justice in the history of the Renaissance, IMHO. His general reputation has never caught up with the fact of the reattribution of many of Masaccio's works to Masolino. At the time of writing by Vasari, all of the Brancacci Chapel was attributed to Masaccio, but it is now clear that at least half of the works, including the most perspectival and the most humanistic, are clearly understood to have been by Masolino. Moreover, he was much in demand for decorating halls with panels of Uomini Famosi, as many as 330 historical figures of men and women (now lost) that set the tone for the entire humanistic revival as early as 1440, nearly a hundred years before Michelangelo assayed the Sistine Chapel.. These achievements are far greater than Masaccio's feeble output or those of any of the other artists you name. I will continue to try to find ways to bring this tragedy to the attention of the wider community.

Disambiguation link notification for April 17
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Arthur Hughes (artist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page April Love (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 01:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

--LT910001 (talk) 02:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Émilie du Châtelet paragraph
Dear Editor Cwtyler, your edit on Émilie du Châtelet seems basically good to me, but it has a load of technical faults that I think it up to you to remedy. I am telling you this here instead of putting some kind of tag on the paragraph and instead of just deleting it. In case they are not obvious to you, here are one or two of them: no citations, when they are definitely needed; faulty mathematical mark-up. I trust you will shortly do the things needed to remedy the faults.Chjoaygame (talk) 00:09, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

January 2017
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Ivan Vukadinov, from its old location at User:Cwtyler/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 11:33, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ivan Vukadinov (January 15)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ivan Vukadinov and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister  talk  18:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ivan Vukadinov (May 9)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eddie891 was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Ivan Vukadinov and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eddie891 (talk) 01:42, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ivan Vukadinov has been accepted
 Ivan Vukadinov, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! –&#8239;Joe (talk) 10:07, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Disambiguation link notification for January 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Wallis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Wallis ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/John_Wallis check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/John_Wallis?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:36, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 12
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Atomic electron transition, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hidden variable ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/Atomic_electron_transition check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/Atomic_electron_transition?client=notify fix with Dab solver]). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:09, 12 November 2019 (UTC)