User talk:Hglass2
| This user is a student editor in Portland_State_University/Byzantine_Art_(Fall_2017) . |
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Hglass2, and welcome to Wikipedia! My name is Shalor and I work with the Wiki Education Foundation; I help support students who are editing as part of a class assignment.
I hope you enjoy editing here. If you haven't already done so, please check out the student training library, which introduces you to editing and Wikipedia's core principles. You may also want to check out the Teahouse, a community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to helping new users. Below are some resources to help you get started editing.
Handouts
|
|---|
Additional Resources
|
|
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 16:13, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Your article
[edit]I have moved your article back to your sandbox as it is not ready to be published. Please do not move it again with consulting Shalor (Wiki Ed). Thanks. Nihlus 00:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- I think it is suitable enough for mainspace, and I intend to accept it. Shalor (Wiki Ed) if there is some pedagogical reason otherwise, please let me know in the next few days. DGG ( talk ) 01:46, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- @DGG: I disagree. Every single sentence has a citation (WP:REPCITE), and there's not much information on the excavation process itself. Further, there is a large amount of MOS:OVERLINK. Additionally, given the large number of citations to the first reference, page numbers should probably be involved to some extent. If those four issues are corrected, then I would have no problem with it being moved to mainspace but oppose moving it any sooner. Nihlus 02:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- This is probably not good enough in citation format for an academic paper but it is good enough for mainspace. The details can be fixed later. . Neither you nor the author owns it. However, as a courtesy, I shall wait till the end of the term. After that, I think the author could be considered inactive and its fair for anyone to work with it.
- We've certainly had problems in he past with students moving things into mainspace prematurely, but we need to watch out that we do not go in the opposite direction. the criteria for afc is that it probably will not get deleted in mainspace--most of us interpret probably as >60% or > 80% (I personally have almost never had anything I moved deleted). For a class, we want a good experience, so it could reasonably be >90%. I understand the reason for making sure the students complete their work to a high standard, but this can be done just as well in mainspace. If you really disagree in general , I'm going to ask for a more general discussion. DGG ( talk ) 03:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- I gave you the issues I had with the article and feel they need to be addressed to some extent before moving to mainspace. Saying "You don't own it, so I will ignore you" is not really beneficial or warranted. Nihlus 03:26, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- @DGG: I disagree. Every single sentence has a citation (WP:REPCITE), and there's not much information on the excavation process itself. Further, there is a large amount of MOS:OVERLINK. Additionally, given the large number of citations to the first reference, page numbers should probably be involved to some extent. If those four issues are corrected, then I would have no problem with it being moved to mainspace but oppose moving it any sooner. Nihlus 02:06, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Nihlus I took into account the areas you felt I needed to address and wanted to know if there is still an area of the draft that I need to work on before publishing, or an area that I did not address appropriately. Thank you for your feedback. Hglass2 (talk) 06:35, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- I think that address my main concerns, so I have moved it to Dionysus mosaic, Samatya. Thanks! (Also, you might get some inspiration from the similar article Dionysus mosaic, Dion.) Nihlus 06:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)