User talk:Owlstand-claudia

Welcome!
Hello, Owlstand-claudia, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Ian.thomson (talk) 17:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

A summary of site guidelines and policies you may find useful

 * Always cite a source for any new information. When adding this information to articles, use, containing the name of the source, the author, page number, publisher or web address (if applicable).
 * We do not publish original thought nor original research. We're not a blog, we're not here to promote any ideology.
 * Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards.  User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided.  Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment).
 * Articles are to be written from a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not concerned with facts or opinions, it just summarizes reliable sources.  Real scholarship actually does not say what understanding of the world is "true," but only with what there is evidence for.
 * It is recommended that you do not add anything relating to yourself to article space, and it is expressly forbidden to use Wikipedia to promote anything about yourself.

Ian.thomson (talk) 17:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Hieronymus Bosch. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

--Owlstand-claudia (talk) 10:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC) Dear Ian, I have read the external links guideline and I believe that nothing is offended. There are several website providing sources in the external links, such as Web Gallery of Art and Artcyclopedia.com. Owlstand is another source useful for reading. All the exhibitions give people the opportunity of having an overview of artists’ works and the website offers an intuitive viewing experience to its users. Furthermore, Owlstand doesn’t request payments from the users and uses public domain images. Would you please explain to me the reasons of you decision about the link? I would like to have more information so that we can find a solution. Thank you very much, Regards, Owlstand-claudia


 * Owlstand.com fail the following sections of WP:ELNO
 * 1) "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a featured article." -- The material on the page you linked to was unsourced, gave no indication that it was by a recognized authority (i.e. by someone famous as an art historian), and had little-to-no apparent professional editorial oversight or fact-checking.
 * 8) "Direct links to documents that require external applications or plugins (such as Flash or Java) to view the content, unless the article is about such file formats." - This is undeniable. The Javascript may be aesthetically simple, but I only got a white screen when I left my Javascript off (indicating that it would either be useless or problematic for users whose monthly data is more severely restricted).
 * 10) "Social networking sites (such as Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Instagram), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), Twitter feeds, Usenet newsgroups or e-mail lists." - This and 11 seem to fall together in this case. Owlstand pushes the idea of users creating galleries to share, without any editorial oversight, almost serving as a social media site for artists and art-lovers.
 * 11) "Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority." - Reasons given for parts 1 and 10.
 * That your username includes "Owlstand" in it also makes it appear as though you're editing with a conflict of interest, which is not recommended. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)