User talk:Joshuadfisher

Welcome[edit]

Welcome!

Hello, Joshuadfisher, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Hananekosan (talk) 22:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions, including your edits to [[:Marco Sartor]]. However, please be aware of Wikipedia's policy that biographical information about living persons must not be libelous. Any controversial statements about a living person added to an article, or any other Wikipedia page, must include proper sources. Thank you. Hi, Joshuadfisher. Nice work with the article on Marco Sartor, which is coming along nicely. There are a few issues with the article that I want to bring to your attention as they will need to be addressed.

First off, throughout the article, please add inline citations to verifiable references that are the sources of the statements made. This is very important. I see that you have citations regarding some of his awards, which is great, but other facts in the article must be backed up with references or are likely to be deleted by other editors (and proper references would be required before the text could be restored).

Additionally, please be very careful that the reviews you included in the article are truly paraphrased from their sources and not copied in any way. Please write around lengthy direct quotes. I'd also suggest writing around the review in the Spanish-language source; you could summarize it into English, for instance. Most readers of the English Wikipedia cannot read Spanish and it's pointless to include the Spanish text. It's completely permitted to cite sources in other languages, though, which is why I suggest rewriting into English. The reviews must also have proper references, including reference formatting. It is not enough to merely include the source websites, in text, as you've done with the second and third reviews. This is also quite important.

The comments you included with the photo you released to Wikimedia commons state that it's a publicity photo of Marco. If you are his publicist, as many will assume, please be very careful that you maintain a neutral point-of-view when editing the article.

To avoid having other editors remove some of the categories with which the article has been tagged, you probably want to make sure the article text makes it clear why the categories were chosen. They are all self-explanatory to me, except the "American Classical Guitarist" category because nowhere in the article does it mention his having moved to the US or having an American parent, etc.

Please don't take my comments personally, as they are in no way intended to be personal criticism. I'm just trying to help by making you aware of issues that require attention in order to avoid problems.

By the way, there is no "controversial" information that I can see in the article. I tagged the article with this note because of the need for inline citations and improved references.

If you have any questions, let me know and I will do my best to help out.

Hananekosan (talk) 22:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I responded to your questions/comments on my talk page and just wanted to drop you a line here so you know to look there. (From, Hanane) AKA Hananekosan (talk) 05:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took a stab at translating the review that was in Spanish on Marco's page. Just notifying you here, more details are at my talk page. Hananekosan (talk) 08:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MS[edit]

Well the article looks in good shape. The references to printed media can be made into footnotes too - if you cna give the issue number or date or both so much the better (there are cite templates if you wish to use them). Incidentally SmackBot does not place these tags in general, just adds the date to them. Rich Farmbrough, 19:36, 31 August 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Update on MS article[edit]

Hi, Sorry for being out of touch for a few days. I had some time to get back tot he MS article this evening and it's looking great. The references you added look good. I read the El Pais article and used it for inline citations where I could (it gave us a reference for some of the information that didn't previously have a published reference, such as the teaching programs). There are some more places in the article that could use citations, and some of the references we already have might work in some cases, but I don't think it's dire that we address them immediately. I believe we can address them as we come upon them or when otherwise updating the article. I don't think there's any chance of the article getting nominated for deletion at this point because it's fleshed out, categorized, establishes notability, keeps a neutral POV, and cites sources.

I still need to check with an admin on the direct quotes (the reviews), but I think we're probably ok with that as well if no bots that try to detect copyright violations have reported a problem yet.

Let me know if you have any questions. Nice job with the article and, again, welcome to Wikipedia! Hananekosan (talk) 11:09, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up re: Marco Sartor[edit]

Hello and I hope you're well. I revisited the Marco article today and read through the entire article from which the quoted first review is derived. I believe it fine to leave it as is, as it's shown as a quote and cited. My opinion is that it can stay. If someone complains, we can change it then, but I think it unlikely that anyone will. The bots that run would have reported it long ago if it didn't pass their checking algorithms. In the off chance this causes any problems in the future, and I don't happen to notice, let me know and I'll help you straighten it out.

I want to add a reference to the klassicaa.com source but their site seems to be down (?). Do you know what the direct URL to the original, Spanish, review is?

Also, when I did the translation, I included a parenthetical comment about what digitization means because I wasn't familiar with the (English) word in that context. After rereading the first review you included, along with the article it came from, I see that that author used "fingering" to describe the same thing. I'm not at all familiar with guitars and the playing thereof (though I appreciate the music), so it never would have occurred to me to translate the concept as such. If you have a preference between

changing it to "fingering"
removing the parenthetical comment and leaving "digitization"
leaving it as is

let me know and I can change it (or feel free to do so yourself).

Thanks. Happy September from Hanane (Hananekosan (talk) 19:03, 8 September 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Enrique Graf Promo.tif[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Enrique Graf Promo.tif. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. We hope (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]