User talk:Naboc1

Re: Wiki Assingment 1
Good job! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of AO edit
Hi Naboc1,

I wanted to provide a more thorough explanation of why your addition to the Allegheny Observatory article was reverted. Primarily, the issue is with the Wikipedia policy listed under "What Wikipedia is not". Specifically, this Wikipedia policy states that Wikipedia is not a directory, and specifically, that "contact information such as phone numbers, fax numbers and email addresses are not encyclopedic". Further policy states that Wikipedia is not a guidebook. Specifically this policy states that "Wikipedia is an encyclopedic reference" and "articles should not real like... Travel guides". Primarily your addition to the article read like brochure or travel guide listing the times and dates of available tours, along with a contact phone number, with little other information. While this may be useful, it is not encyclopedic and violates existing policy. The "External links" exists to allow a reader to pursue such information on the websites of topics associated with such articles. Information about tours of the observatory would be appropriate if it contributed factual and historic information about the tours using and citing published, verifiable, reliable sources, and as long as such additions did not consist of unencylopedic schedule and contact information that violate policy. Such information may be hard to find in published, secondary sources, however there are plenty of other areas of the observatory article that can use additional information, as most of the existing topics could be greatly expanded. Just remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and although that may mean articles are more restrictive in content and creativity, the intent is to have Wikipedia articles serve the specific purpose of conveying encyclopedic information in a factual, neutral manner that is quite different than how similar information might be presented on a typical website, blog, or even in a book. I hope this make sense and helps you with your future Wikipedia edits. CrazyPaco (talk) 06:29, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Question about a source
Add a regular citation (Author, Title, Journal, Date/Volume, link to journal) to Description section in the image, then add a link to the appendix, both described (as "Link to journal", "Link to appendix", for example). PS. Few more map comments: Greenland is part of Denmark. You did a good job with the map, although I do think that some of the choices on it are questionable - but that is the issue with the authors, nothing related to you guys. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 16:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good job. One final thing comes to mind: the article states that countries under 1 million are not included on the list (which explains the lack of Iceland in the appendix). I'd suggest you add a fourth color (gray?) and use the list here to move some countries from red to gray. That said, why is Cyprus on the list... at least I don't think any other country < 1m is big enough to matter, so I'd suggest just graying Iceland and making a note in the map that it is a special case (not included in the appendix but big enough to be noticeable). PS. Once you are done with that, for the extra effort involved in creating a map I will give you an extra credit point :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:55, 10 June 2010 (UTC)