|NOTICE, please do not remove from top of page.|
|I worked on this article on the Wikipedia and intend to maintain and develop it on Citizendium.|
|Oliver Renye 16:44, 23 November 2008 (UTC)|
Hi Oliver. Thanks for joining us at Citizendium. I had a look at the edit history for the Wikipedia version of this article. You must be user Bylot over there.
I noticed that there were a lot of other contributors to that article before you got involved, which means that some of the text you copied over here is not actually yours. That's okay, but we need to check the "from Wikipedia" box on the article. Your statement above is also somewhat misleading on that point. You say that you were the sole author of the text but that is not really true.
I haven't checked the other articles that you brought over at the same time, but the same criteria apply. Could you please either (1) remove the text that originated with other Wikipedia authors or (2) check the "from Wikipedia" box on the article and remove your notice above? Thanks much. --Joe Quick 18:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hello Joe,
- Yes, at the Wikipedia I wrote (I don't write there anymore!) under the pseudonym Bylot.
- When I started editing the former text on Bobby Driscoll in about March 2008 it was just a poor stub, and not very much is left now from the “original” text.
- The articles on Billy Chapin and Sally Jane Bruce I also extended from brief stubs up to the today C- and start articles.
- So in all three cases I consider myself the actual major author of them.
- Yet I remove all three WPauthor templates.
--Oliver Renye 19:35, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
Moving Table of Contents to top of page -- let's discuss it on this page
Let's continue the discussion here, where it belongs, and not on the Write-a-Thon page.
In any case, welcome aboard!
We do do things a little differently from WP, as you will discover. Although, as a former WP guy myself, who did a lot of stuff over there, it takes a while to adjust.
I myself, and many other Citizens, feel that too much white space caused by a long TOC is not what we want the finished articles to look like. So that once an index starts getting as long as that in the Driscoll article, it frequently gets moved to the top right of the page. Not always, but almost always if someone (like myself) takes the trouble to make the actual move. I'm trying to think of an example, but I honestly can't think of a single case in which someone objected to the move enough to argue about it and then move it back.
I myself think that the new page looks a *lot* better, and I've looked at it with both Internet Explorer and Firefox, which display somewhat differently. But, of course, that's just my own opinion....
Why don't you try to find some other people to take a look at the article and get their opinion on the matter. If you look at "Recent Changes" you'll find a number of congenial people such as Howard, Matt, and Chris (among others) who are regular contributors and who would probably be happy to offer their two cents' worth if you ask them to.
Best.... Hayford Peirce 18:45, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't want to ague - I'm always ready to accept competent critics and advises. But your edit just split up the introduction text; - I moved the headshot from left to right, - right beneath the TOC. Now it looks better. Nevertheless I will ask other users for reviews and oppinions.
- I hope it's o.k. with the images, which I uploaded and the Fair Use Rationales, I wrote. All of them (except the Oscar-photo, which I personally possess) are displayed unclaimed on many various websites, galleries and Film/TV-databases (moviekids.org, for instance, exists since more than 8 years!), and with that is not more accessible than it already is.
- Intentionally I used promotional images (actually once created for that purpose), displayed on "reliable" websites where possible and reduced the sizes down to mere samples to meet this problem.
- From my point of view, the article on Bobby Driscoll is complete.
- Unless new and important facts about his life come up, I have nothing else to add. How to get it approved? - Or what is still missing, what possibly dispensible?
- Best regards --Oliver Renye 19:33, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sure, see if you can get some other opinions on the photo and TOC. I vaguely recall a couple of articles on which we fiddled around with photos and the TOC for a week or so, moving them around, resizing, etc. before everyone was satisfied. (As I said, one problem is the browser that each contributor is using -- articles can look *very* different on different monitors....)
- As far as using the photos, who knows? We've talked, argued, discussed this for the last couple of years but Stephen Ewen, our prime expert here, doesn't seem to be very active recently. On the whole, we're a lot more conservative about using photos than WP, but we *do* allow them. I'm afraid that I simply can't offer an opinion other than that I think yours are fine. Others may object, however.... Try contacting Stephen.
- For approval, you need at least one, maybe more, Editor from the Workgroup in question, in this case either Visual Arts or Theatre. I don't think there are any active editors in either Workgroup -- the bane of present-day CZ: not enough Editors. You might scan the list of Editors in each Workgroup, however, and send emails to all of them, asking them to take a look at the article. Good luck! (By the way, it looks like fine, definitive article to me. As you say, What more can be added?) Hayford Peirce 20:06, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've not gone through all of the images yet, but the ones I've seen typically don't have a real name associated with them (which is outside CZ policy) or precise source URLs. Either of those would be enough to tag them for deletion. They appear on Wikipedia as well, uploaded by the same author. John Stephenson 15:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)