User talk:Rabidcitizen

Zoe Crosher
Hello Rabidcitizen, this is Miranche, Zoe Crosher's spouse. I saw that your edit about the Reconsidered Archive has been reverted by Cameron Scott, with the comment "OR, synthesis, puff". The best thing to do, I think, is to contact the user who did this on his talk page and discuss the matter with him.

"OR" means "original research", and this is probably the most important comment. The gist of it is that what you wrote sounded to this user like your own analysis rather than independently verifiable information. Here's how to address this:
 * It's important to provide sources for every piece of information you are trying to impart. This will sometimes mean one reference per paragraph, and sometimes one every few words.  Take e.g. "The process Crosher uses in the series is similar to those of other artists working with appropriation (Richard Prince, Sherrie Levine), in that the original photographs are re-photographed or digitally scanned and then reprinted as a book or photograph."  This sentence probably needs at least two sources: one describing Zoe's technique, the other the other documenting the technique of the other two artists.
 * If there's only one source for a piece of info, it may make sense to say exactly where it comes from. So for info from the Art Forum article which you cited as a reference, e.g. "a 2011 article/review in Art Forum mentioned that ..." -- unfortunately I don't have access to the article so I can't tell what.
 * Link to technical terms such as appropriation the first time you mention them -- if someone who's not knowledgeable about art (like myself) comes across the term, they won't know what you're talking about, and it may come off more "original" than it is. It may take some effort looking for the right article to link to, but it's better for you to do it than for the reader later on.

Here is what Cameron Scott probably meant by "synthesis", "puff" is self-explanatory. The synthesis criterion is actually pretty subtle, as what may sound neutral in casual talk may not pass as such in encyclopedic content. Here's how you could approach this:
 * You are editing the page in good faith, looking for a way to update the information while mindful of the possible conflict of interest. Assuming good faith is actually Wikipedia policy, and if reasons for someone else's intervention in what you contribute aren't clear, s/he will typically be forthcoming if asked to provide detailed feedback in addition to (or instead of) a straight out revert. If they're not forthcoming, you can call them on it.
 * Any changes people don't agree on are resolved in dialogue. Every once in a while I need to thresh out what I wrote with someone for whom it doesn't pass muster, and a mutually acceptable solution is always found.  So, you may need to discuss what you're writing with other users sentence by sentence, providing quotes from material that's not accessible online (such as the Art Forum article) to figure out how best to phrase it in encyclopedic terms.  I'm pretty sure once it starts going, it'll roll.
 * When you leave messages on other users' pages, sign them with four tildes. It comes out similar to my signature on the bottom (mine is slightly personalized).

By the way your revision before the revert is accessible here, press "Edit" if you want to access & copy some of the markup. Don't press "Save page" by mistake, you'll be undoing the revert and starting an edit war if you do :). There are no winners in an edit war, and the biggest loser is the article being edited.  Good luck.

– MirancheT C 02:07, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't add anything to that except 1) we will never allow an advert and 2) stick only to fact that you can source to reliable sources and nobody will argue over your edits. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:58, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

One more bit -- it may make sense to edit the page in your user space, in other words to create the page User:Rabidcitizen/Zoe Crosher and keep a working copy of the article there. Then you can ask other users for feedback without them reverting entire paragraphs. – MirancheT C 18:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Rabidcitizen, I found a guideline to which you can refer if you feel you're getting too much flak from established users. :) – MirancheT C 22:51, 13 October 2011 (UTC)