User talk:DavidSycamore

Architects
I've replied to your question at my talkpage. Go ahead and dive in. If you're working on something that will require some time to get into shape, you can draft the article in userspace and copy it into article space when it's ready, for example at User:DavidSycamore/sandbox. You can create any number of userspace pages using that format, and drafting it helps to keep it from being deleted if you haven't made notability clear from the beginning. I can help you with reference formatting as well, since it's rather difficult, and WP's user interface is somewhat less than easy to learn.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Lists
I take a pragmatic approach. In practice, I am in favour of lists within articles, if a list really is the best way of conveying information. For example, if an architect designed only six buildings in two decades, or 10 buildings in three cities, or eight buildings in several categories (churches, houses, commercial premises) then it is easy to deal with every building in individual sentences or paragraphs under appropriate section headings. But if you have no intention of describing every single building by a prolific architect, then a list toward the bottom of the article is the most practical solution. It is also something that other contributors will be pleased to add to, if they have info to hand. A list of less than ten works is probably not worth doing as you can alway include them by writing a sentence: "Other bridges by Bloggs include the those over the Bogong River at Bong Bong, over Jerry's Creek at Piddledee, and over the Tarry Inlet at Tillydale."

If an architect is very prolific, then it is worth creating a separate page called List of architectural works by John Bloggs. Then it is possible to introduce a picture for every work, if one is available, and you'll find other contributors who really enjoy contributing missing pics. See List of works by Leonardo da Vinci. Not architecture, but it gives an idea of what can be done.

You will find that there are Wiki-purists who are dedicated law-enforcers. This can sometimes make life very difficult. Read the Manuscript of style, which you can access from the left hand column help file. But someone politer than me will probably drop round and leave you details of the pages and info you most need. (I have to look them up all the time).

What I can say is:
 * Don't ever bother saying something is "famous", and if you must cite it as an architect's "most famous" work, then back it up with a reference, even if what you are saying is as ridiculously obvious as St Paul's Cathedral or the Eiffel Tower.
 * If you say something is "unique", then the sentence must indicate that it is indeed "one of a kind" in some way.
 * Don't ever bother using the words "beautiful" or any such. They are regarded as "Peacock terms" and not encyclopaedic. You can get away with adjectives such as "precise", "detailed", "decorative", "robust", and even "brutal" but not "magnificent"........ although I put up a good case for it over St Peter's Basilica.
 * Form links in the text, create a section called Other pages and link to other Wiki articles. Also, go round the traps and form links within existent articles to the one that you have written, so that it isn't an "orphan".
 * Pictures: It is generally preferred (and sometime rigorously enforced) to have most pics as "thumbnail" size. i.e. you don't state a size in pix. Vertical picture often have the word "upright"  which means they are quite small.  On the other hand, your introductory pic can be big, so save it for a building rather than the portrait of the architect.  There is a neat way of inserting several pics in a row, but you have to fiddle with the sizes. See Romanesque architecture.
 * Articles are generally quality assessed sooner or later. A decision is also made by somebody (it can be the author of the article) as to the relative importance of the particular article to the subject as a whole.   If you are the person who does this, be aware that individual  architects and individual buildings don't normally rate "Top" priority. That is reserved mainly for generic articles like Roman architecture, Renaissance architecture, for the odd few who are up there with Palladio and buildings as significant as the Taj Mahal.  Few individual architects and only a small minority of buildings are in the "High" priority category.  I am saying this because some (undoubtedly well-intentioned) person inserted every single modern American architect into the "Top" priority listing. I removed most of them.....anyway, I'm getting ahead of myself, because you need to write the articles first...

Have fun! Drop me a message if you need help.

Amandajm (talk) 17:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh I notice a proper welcom has been added while I've been writing this! Amandajm (talk) 17:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Pradeep Dadha
If you are affliated with or represent Pradeep Dadha or an affiliated company, please follow WP:COI before you edit any related articles. Thank you. Novaseminary (talk) 03:55, 28 November 2012 (UTC)