User talk:Keninyork

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thanks very much for your excellent contributions to the Unifon article. I must ask, though: did you write this material yourself, or did you copy it from some previously-published source? If the latter, it will need to be changed to avoid copyright issues.

Thanks again.

-- Dominus 19:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keninyork response[edit]

The text is mine unless it is quoted and credit is given. The alphabet displayed was approved by Dr. Malone in 2005; the font is my design.

The research involved may be more jornalistic than encyclopedic--I rely as much as possible on primary sources and corroborate from secondary sources. Some of the primary sources have not given me permission to use their nomes--yet.

Thanks for your quick input. Now I would ask you to look over the comments I made about citations and suggest how I can handle them.

Keninyork 23:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John M. Culkin article[edit]

I am doing my best to fight the deletion attempt on the Culkin article. Do you have an online copy or at least a digital or scanned image version of his New York Times obituary? That is the problem with anyone who existed before the Internet boom of the last ten years: there is little info for these spoiled youngsters to find for themselves about Culkin. Also: Do you know of any other books (their ISBN numbers are important) that were written or edited by Culkin or at least mention him?--Mightyms 15:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mightyms seems to have saved the Culkin article. It was just a matter a following a rigid but undocumented set of styles and guidelines. Basically:

external links have to be plowed into the text as in-line citaions using the <ref> markups. See Wikipedia:Inline citation. It is probably best to have NO external links section
quotes should be kept to one or two
Intelligent Googling. Here is a pretty-good search: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=john+culkin+-Macaulay+-praxis&btnG=Google+Search . It assumes that the Culkin Award is alredy well-documented.
{{underconstruction}} may or may not hold off the deletionists
You have try to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style for some other clues, but it is tedious.

You are welcome.--SupperBird 22:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for keeping and fixing the Culkin article. As you can see now, he was worth keeping. I got called away to another project before I could continue my Wiki learning curve, which is more substantial that I anticipated. So I really appreciate the efforts to retain his bio.

I sent my only copy of the New York Times obit to the unifon group at www.unifon.org. You may read it here, reprinted: http://www.unifon.org/htm/Documents/Culkin%20Obituary.pdf

There is also a photo from that obit posted here: http://www.unifon.org/htm/John_Culkin.htm

Very few of Culkin's works remain extant except for what I've been able to acquire, and all of it has gone to the unifon group. They seem to be the ones most interested in keeping his legacy alive. I feel much better now that he's in Wikipedia. Thanks again. Sorry I was so slow.

Oh, yes, one other thing I noticed: Mary Culkin is listed, not John, as contributor to the second of the published works. John never married and was survived by one brother; I doubt if Mary Culkin is a viable entry here. Nor can I locate the original article.

Keninyork