User talk:Rosencomet/Starwood Festival

Dead Link
This could be a useful source, but the link is presently dead. I;ll see if that can be fixed. * "Expanding the Frontiers of Your Consideration" article

Only Passing Reference

 * Blain, Jenny & Douglas Ezzy & Graham Harvey (2004) Researching Paganisms (The Pagan Studies Series). AltaMira Press ISBN 0-7591-0523-5, ISBN 978-0-7591-0523-2
 * Bloch, Jon P. (1998) New Spirituality, Self, and Belonging: How New Agers and Neo-Pagans Talk About Themselves. Praeger/Greenwood ISBN 0-275-95957-0
 * Gray, Edward R. & Scott Thumma (2004) Gay Religion. AltaMira Press ISBN 0-7591-0325-9, ISBN 978-0-7591-0325-2
 * Grimassi, Raven (2000) Encyclopedia of Wicca & Witchcraft. Llewellyn Publications ISBN 1-56718-257-7, ISBN 978-1-56718-257-6
 * Monaghan, Patricia (1999) Meditation, the Complete Guide. New World Library ISBN 1-57731-088-8, ISBN 978-1-57731-088-4
 * Pitzl-Waters, Jason (2007) Round the Fire: Traveling Pagan Troubadours and Festival Culture (Mentions Jim Alan at Starwood)
 * Singer, Maria (2005) Dancing the Fire: The Ins and Outs of Neo-Pagan Festivals and Gatherings. Citadel ISBN 0-8065-2534-7
 * St. John, G. (2003) Rave Culture and Religion. Routledge ISBN 0-415-31449-6, ISBN 978-0-415-31449-7

No Starwood Mention (I could have SWORN Starwood was mentioned therein)

 * Gilboa, Netta "Getting Gray With Reverend Ivan Stang" Gray Areas
 * Hunter, Jennifer (2000) 21st Century Wicca: A Young Witch's Guide to Living the Magical Life. Citadel ISBN 0-8065-1887-1, ISBN 978-0-8065-1887-9
 * Edain McCoy (2004) If You Want to Be a Witch: A Practical Introduction to the Craft. Llewellyn Publications ISBN 0-7387-0514-4, ISBN 978-0-7387-0514-9

Admitted Limitations
Obviously, I never learned how to direct several identical footnotes to a single listing. Rosencomet (talk) 21:31, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Now is a good time to learn! Use:   for the first instance, and   for any subsequent use, where "source" is the name you give the first instance.  Try it.  Viriditas (talk) 22:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Use of lists
Right now it is best if you focus on writing content, not compiling lists. Do you have a good source selection that discusses the Starwood Festival? I would like to review it. Viriditas (talk) 22:50, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Lists of featured speakers and entertainers isn't essential to writing about the topic at this point. If reliable sources have covered these people and their attendance, then it may be useful to write about highlights of certain festival participants. Look at the list of GA and FA articles below to see how his is handled appropriately. A list of random people doesn't really work, whereas sections about specific aspects of the festival do.  The problem here is topical and relevant presentation.  Viriditas (talk) 04:32, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I see you are still spending a lot of time adding web citations to this list. Again, I think this is a waste of time.  Did you look at the quality content articles to see how to best present performers?  Also, many of the cites you are adding are not reliable sources.  It might be best to put this aside and focus on writing content from the best sources that you have instead.  This is surely a faster way to improving the article.  This list isn't helping. Viriditas (talk) 21:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I see you are still adding unreliable web sources to support the listing. Again, this isn't helping.  I think I'm going to stop participating at this point, since you do not appear to be serious about improving this article. Viriditas (talk) 08:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Quality content
Here are some quality festival-related articles for you to look at and compare:
 * Ashton Court Festival (GA)
 * Bud Billiken Parade and Picnic (GA)
 * Eeyore's Birthday Party (GA)
 * Glastonbury Festival (GA)
 * Grant Park Music Festival (GA)
 * World Science Festival, 2008 (FA)

After looking at these articles and how they use their sources and present their content, see if you can improve the focus and presentation of Starwood. Viriditas (talk) 03:58, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Lead
The lead section should be completely rewritten, paying attention to WP:LEAD and readability. The current version reads like multiple lists, not an accessible summary. For some ideas, look at the lead sections in the articles listed under "Quality content" above. Viriditas (talk) 05:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

References and further reading
Per WP:LAYOUT, reference and further reading sections appear after notes. Viriditas (talk) 04:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)