User talk:Socratesart

Socratesart, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]

Hi Socratesart! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Mz7 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erik Reel (July 5)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by TheChunky were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Youtube is not the reliable sources. And creator had added YouTube links just like promotion of its videos. Also try finding some more reliable sources and add them.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Erik Reel and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Erik Reel, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 21:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Erik Reel has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Erik Reel. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 07:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@scope creep - thank you for your suggestions. I've added more than two new references, an Exhibitions and Writing section, cleaned up references. Not sure what correct way to give you a "heads up" Socratesart:talk 16:49, 15 August 2021 (UTC)Socratesart:talk 16:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)Socratesart:talk 16:54, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Erik Reel suggestion and improvements[edit]

Discussion on Draft:Erik Reel added here[edit]

Hi, Hope you are doing well, here are some suggestions you need to edit.

You have added: External links

Bio Statement – ERIK REEL
Erik ReeL website: erikreel.com
Erik Reel at Frameworks - The Santa Barbara Independent
Erik ReeL - Arts Ventura
Erik Reel | Artist Profile with Bio - MutualArt
Erik ReeL bei artists24.net - Künstler, Kunst und Kunstwerke
Riehl, Sean (2014) The Visual Language of Erik ReeL, documentary video, Riehl Body Works production https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebnSpnwSvl4
Vonk, Nathan 3 February 2015) "Out of the Great Wide Open at MCA," Santa Barbara Independent, 3 February 2015, https://www.independent.com/2015/02/03/review-out-great-wide-open-mcasb

most of these have now been deleted.-Socratesart (talk) 01:06, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion First of all you need to know what the External links are and how to use them. - For external link see Wikipedia:External links - For usage see Help:External links and references

Also using simply text in external is discouraged, you have to add official website etc which will be helpful for the readers. Also using <nowiki> tag alone without any reason is not good at all. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 04:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will add more suggestion. After improvements of above. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 04:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TheChunkySomeone had taken my wikipedia draft for this article and posted on wikitia and then added these external links. I copied them from wikitia without really understanding anything about external links, so maybe I should just delete all of them(?)Socratesart (talk) 17:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete them but see Wikipedia:External Links for adding some related and good links like official website etc. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 19:16, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You had added two external links one is YouTube documentary and another is from Independent.com. I don't whether they are informative or related to article. But I have reformatted them. See there and remember the format for next time. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 19:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This section is just waste Further reading

Arconi, Nikki (2016) "Markings", Erik Reel Painting, catalog: 1250-1456. Centaur Editore
Santini, Enrico (2008) Erik Reel: Paintings and Drawings. Catalog, Barcelona: Centaur Editore
Vonk, Nathan 3 February 2015) "Out of the Great Wide Open at MCA," Santa Barbara Independent, 3 February 2015, https://www.independent.com/2015/02/03/review-out-great-wide-open-mcasb/ ref 17 May 2020
Westbrook, Ashley (October 2017) “Welcome to Planet Reel,” Ventana, vol. 11 No 8, pp. 17-20

— The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 19:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, leave that wikitia, now let's focus on article here. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 02:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Now work on References

The references you added are not from reliable sources [← see.]

Some references to books are there, you have added ISBN also to one of th but that ISBN is not available anywhere in world. Is that book really exist?. Find reliable sources and add them. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri ^{(Speak🗣️ or Write✍️)} 02:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Signing posts[edit]

You are often forgetting to sign your posts on talk pages. See Wikipedia:Signatures-- Toddy1 (talk) 06:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Erik Reel has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Erik Reel. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 20:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Drunken Silenus (July 19)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Socratesart/The Drunken Silenus and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Socratesart/The Drunken Silenus, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:Socratesart/The Drunken Silenus[edit]

Hello, Socratesart. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The Drunken Silenus".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad. It's a major book written by a major art critic on two of the most famous of painters; but that "stub" is all the information I have. Everything in it is suitable for Wikipedia, in spite of the decision by someone that it is not notable. If this book and its author are not notable, then at least 80% of the content of the current Wikipedia is not notable.Socratesart:talk 22:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do not plan working on this article further. I stand by my statement above, but I have no more to add to this "stub"-others might.Socratesart:talk 19:19, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Due to status of author, I suggest this be posted as a stub to be added to by others Socratesart:talk 22:24, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erik Reel (June 17)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Scope creep was:

I think he is probably notable. His work is very distinctive and visually attractive. Do the following.

Article needs to be cleaned up. Removed citations neeed. You usually remove these when you're putting the reference in. Do that.
Add an exhibition section, if you can with references.
Add two other WP:Secondary sources that prove he is notable.

Give me a shout after your finished.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Erik Reel and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Erik Reel, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

scope_creep^Talk 15:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Erik Reel (September 1)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Hoary was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Arconi, Nikki (2016). Erik ReeL Painting: 1250-1456 (Exhibition catalog). Centaur Editore. Retrieved 19 May 2020., cited five times, sounds vaguely impressive, even if the link (to a page in Reel's own website) doesn't work. I note that Reel's book Pterodactyl Cries comes from the same publisher.

However, WorldCat doesn't show a single library as possessing a copy of either book, and "Centaur Editore" appears to be a vanity publisher.

WorldCat also doesn't show a single copy of Erik Reel: Face to Face, Erik ReeL: Full Circle, or Erik ReeL: Tabula Rasa.

It does list the book Magic is a Shift in Perception, but says (i) this was published by Blurb, and (ii) it isn't in any library.

I'll assume that each of these six does exist, somewhere. Its existence has failed to tempt a single library that contributes to WorldCat. This in itself is rather a strike against notability. But it also means that readers would have considerable difficulty in verifying claims made in this draft. --

Hoary (talk) 22:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Difficulties with artist's catalogues [not distributed to libraries, not digitized due to piracy concerns] have already been noted in previous discussions, even though main source of information regarding living artists.Socratesart:talk 22:14, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Despite what you suggest, artists' catalogues that aren't conventionally published are acquired by libraries, do appear in WorldCat, and can be consulted in the relevant libraries by adults who persevere. If you want examples, consider Rosalind Solomon:

Rosalind Solomon, Washington: May 15 – June 29, 1980. Washington, DC: Corcoran Gallery, 1980. Twenty-page exhibition catalogue, text by Jane Livingston. OCLC 6603279
Rosalind Solomon: Venezia, 13. VII – 14. VIII. 1982. Venice: Ikona Photo Gallery, 1982. Eighteen-page exhibition catalogue, ed. Živa Kraus, text by Ljerka Mifka. OCLC 45754749
Rosalind Solomon: India: An exhibition of photographs. New Delhi: M. Pistor for the United States Information Service, 1983. Sixteen-page exhibition catalogue, text by Will Stapp. OCLC 37799484
Rosalind Solomon. Earth Rites: Photographs from inside the Third World. San Diego, CA: Museum of Photographic Arts, 1986. Twelve-page exhibition catalogue, text by Arthur Ollman. OCLC 864687499
Rosalind Solomon: Photographs, 1976–1987. Tucson, Arizona: Etherton Gallery, 1988. Thirty-two-page exhibition catalogue. With an essay by Arthur Ollman. OCLC 18130563
Rosalind Solomon: El Perú y Otros Lugares = Peru and Other Places. Lima: Museo de Arte de Lima, 1996. Exhibition catalogue. With an introductory essay by Natalia Majluf [Wikidata] and Jorge Villacorta; text in Spanish and English. OCLC 37465560

Click on any of the OCLC links and you'll see a WorldCat record. But of course a catalogue may fail to interest any library. If a catalogue cannot be found in any library contributing to WorldCat, then in effect it cannot be found (although you're welcome to specify the libraries that don't contribute to WorldCat where it can be found). If it cannot be found, then what's attributed to it is not verifiable, and can't be included in an article here. -- Hoary (talk) 02:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or a catalog is too rare or collectible for libraries to get. Rosalind Solomon was born in 1930, a generation earlier than ReeL so in long run could be a less notable artist.

Wikipedia's stated criteria for notability for visual artists is two museum collections, a bar ReeL passes. So are Wikipedia standards standards or are they not? Of course, if a guy plays a single NFL game, they get two pages in Wikipedia no questions asked, while the cultural info in Wikipedia has huge holes in it, especially when it comes to women creatives [the criticisms here all attack or discount work by women].

I'm tired of reviewers making false statements. I've already seen unethical behaviour inside Wikipedia.

So OK, I'll back off and abandon this article. As for notability, time will tell, won't it?Socratesart:talk 08:02, 16 September 2021 (UTC)Socratesart:talk 08:34, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Erik Reel has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Erik Reel. Thanks! scope_creep^Talk 06:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Erik Reel[edit]

Hello, Socratesart. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Erik Reel, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:03, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]