User talk:RGP

 Welcome to the Wikipedia user discussion page for RGP.

To leave a message on this page, click [ here.]''

'''*In order to make conversations go smoothly, please follow WP:TALK and WP:AGF when contributing to my talk page. Comments that don't may be immediately deleted.'''

*Sign your post using four tildes ( -- )

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Further reading, etc
Further_reading is the relevant guideline. WP:MOSBIO might be helpful with this and other concerns. --Ronz (talk) 23:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I will read these over the weekend and get back on this, including making any necessary changes I can see. -- RGP (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * A few things are still not clear to me. Should the section be titled "Further Reading" if it contains film references or should it be titled something else, like "Additional Information"? Would it be okay to make "External Links" a sub-section of "Additional Information"? (And just so you know, I understand that if one of the links or publications in this section come to be used as references in the main article it should be deleted from this section.) After you comment on this, I would like to design the section(s). But I still can't figure out how to put a sandbox on my user page for this purpose. Where exactly is this described and where can the template by found? -- RGP (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Getting more feedback
If you'd like to get others' perspectives quicker, we could use WP:THIRD or another dispute resolution method. WP:THIRD is fast, but requires that only two editors being involved in a dispute. --Ronz (talk) 16:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If you don't mind, I would just as well keep this pace going. I enjoy having you more or less mentor me through some of this, if it is not too much trouble for you. When and if there is some real dispute (after I have read the pertinent policies over and over), then I guess that would be time to go to the next step. Thanks for your patience. -- RGP (talk) 21:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't mind at all. I don't have the time that I'd like to work on it, and don't want to have you waiting for me.  Also, I'd like to involve some editors who have more expertise with biographical articles to address the questions you've brought up. --Ronz (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Getting more people who know what they are doing sounds good to me. (I am still trying to figure out how to get things on my user page.) And I am glad that you can take a little time for this purpose. After getting the links and things in order, I would like to start building a good article with the sources available to me. -- RGP (talk) 22:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist
Thank you for making a listing at this page. Please note your listing has now been dealt with and will soon be archived. Stifle (talk) 12:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. Thanks for taking a look at it so quickly. -- RGP (talk) 22:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Now what?
Over the past several days, I have been working in the "sandbox" on a major revision of the Gene Savoy article. It has already gotten more involved than I had originally expected and I am only about 3/4 through. This brings me to my questions:

What is the best way to use the sandbox on a User Page? Is it best to use it to do sectional work that can then be transferred whole over to the main page? Or is it best to work out the whole thing on the User Page sandbox and then move it over to the main page? And if it is best to work out the whole thing on the User Page first, what is the best or proper way to move the work over to the main page? Is it best to rebuild it again bit by bit, saving each piece as it is moved? Or what?

And here is another question:

Where can I read about or get advice on how to organize my User Page so that it will be possible for me to work on several "sandbox" projects at the same time and name them separately on separate pages? -- RGP (talk) 21:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Good questions. Not sure if I can help much but I'll try...
 * It's important for articles to have an edit history that gives insight into why and how the article changed over time. Using a sandbox to work on a rewrite is problematic because it's almost certain that some of the edit history will be lost.  Usually, I see such temporary articles used as a means to get feedback, rather than a place to do a rewrite.  That said, I don't expect anyone will complain.  You've done a great job.
 * You can make as many subpages in your userspace as you like. --Ronz (talk) 20:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

WP:BIOG
There are many editors that are very experienced writing biographies. WP:BIOG has a lot of information from them, as well as ways to get their help. --Ronz (talk) 20:24, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for adressing points on this page and the Gene Savoy discussion page so quickly. High winds knocked out the electricity here 11/20 and I was unable to respond until now.


 * I would like to contact the biography writers group soon. If it is possible to "neutralize" the Gene Savoy article and balance out contentious statements first, I would like to do that. My plan was to contact them to find out what still has to be done for it to reach "good article" status. --RGP (talk) 00:39, 24 November 2009 (UTC)