Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:29, 5 February 2009

This article uses the following optional standards for Style elements. Please help us maintain consistency in the article by following these standards: Variety of English: Citation style: MLA parentheses Bibliography style: MLA Era denotation: Not applicable Serial comma: Include Em dash or spaced en dash for interruptor: Unspaced em dash Primary system of measurement: Not applicable Other: Please do not change these settings unless consensus has been reached.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Sources?

This article needs further development with a greater variety of sources. It needs more sources in English to be pertinent to English-speaking Misplaced Pages. It may be subject to deletion for lack of notability and possible lack of neutrality due to an insufficient number of various reliable sources from multiple cultures to support the currently-undocumented statements in the lead (introduction). --NYScholar (talk) 16:01, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding sources recently added

Exact page references are necessary for the source citations added. On what specific pages in the sources given do these statements show support? Not verifiable as cited. Please give exact page references and follow the prevailing citation format in the article. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

What are you doing? Your recent vandalism to the citations for Entropa, Tory poster and the Met Police clamping down on music promiters has removed the clickable links so taht readers will not longer be able to verify the source. Please revet immediately. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

No such "vandalism": please Assume good faith (Misplaced Pages policy). I edited the article in good faith. Misplaced Pages articles must follow Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view; I edited the presentation accordingly and made the citation format consistent with the initial citation format (as corrected earlier), which had many errors in it when created by another editor. (Please see the article's history from date of creation.) --NYScholar (talk) 23:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Found inadvertent error in conversion of Harris and fixed that. Not "vandalism"--good faith edit resulting in inadvertent error while making earlier format corrections. (Sorry. Not intentional at all.) --NYScholar (talk) 01:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(cont.) : Please read the sources cited (some of which J. added recently). Sources document and support the statements, except for the two books cited early on which have no page references given for verification/documentation. The statements did not "come" from those two books, as they were not apparently not the specific sources used by the original editor who added an earlier version of those two sentences with no documentation. Page refs. still needed for documentation of the lead. After the page refs. are supplied by other editor(s), the format can be altered to match the others (last name and page number). --NYScholar (talk) 23:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

The sources are all listed, with the verifiable links, in the "Works Cited" section. Please consult the sources, and read the articles, from which the material pertaining to the Metropolitan Police Service (in the case of that statement) comes. Please see the subject of this article "Art and Politics" so as not to lose focus on the subject and what needs to be developed in this article. --NYScholar (talk) 23:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

E.g., Hundal's article is linked directly in the "Works cited", as per the previously prevailing format for this article's source citations (templates were not used initially), and one can read the entire article there. --NYScholar (talk) 23:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC) It is fully "verifiable" via the citation keyed to the last name in the "Works cited" list (see the Style Sheet). --NYScholar (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

In the case of books, the ISBN nos. are the links to verify the books, but page numbers for references still needed to document/support/verify the statements made in the lead to which the in-line citations to these two books added (by J.). Removed the unnecessary link to an author's faculty webpage as it is not appropriate in the source citation. If one wants to create a Misplaced Pages article for that author (if notable enough a subject for Misplaced Pages--see WP:Notability), then the faculty webpage can be in the new article's "external links" section, as per WP:EL. Doesn't belong here and it was removed when converting the templates to previously-consistent source citations following the style sheet (added for guidance--see top of this talk page).

(cont.) Subject documentation format follows Humanities style guidelines for source citations. Both art (art history) and politics (political science) are part of divisions of Humanities in some institutions of higher education that do not have a "College of Arts and Sciences", though it (Political science) is described in Misplaced Pages as a "Social science"; these are specialized disciplines. Either MLA format (for arts and humanities) or APA format (for social sciences) or Harvard referencing format would work for this article. The creator of the article had a mixture of formats with errors. I chose MLA format bec. it is the simplest and least unwieldy, as keyed to "Works cited" before EL sec. (following WP:MOS for layout). --NYScholar (talk) 00:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(cont). --NYScholar (talk) 00:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

From the Google book description (via its ISNB no.) and a book review accessible at Find Articles, it does not appear to me that Silver's 1993 book Art in History clearly enough documents/substantiates/serves as a reliable in-line citation for the statement to which it was provided in the lead. I think it might be useful to quote a statement from the book review, which relates more nearly to the subject "Art and politics": "Still, this is the book that I like the best because I prefer to teach fewer works in wider and deeper context, and because I like how Silver chose and organized his topics to investigate relations between art and power." I'll try to work on a book review entry and add it as a source citation. But page numbers are still needed for Silver's book if used as a source citation--or perhaps a reference to the list of contents as a source citation per se (which I or another editor might be able to link to as well). --NYScholar (talk) 01:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

(cont.) As I said earlier, one needs precise page references to document this and another book source. The statements still need reliable and verifiable source citations that supports them as per WP:V#Sources and WP:CITE. --NYScholar (talk) 01:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I've provided page reference and supporting citations for Silver and used to cite the entire book by Esche and Bradley, which is a collection of essays that they edited. The ISBN nos. lead to the books, with links to book descriptions in various online catalogues that appear to me to support the statement cited (as revised). --NYScholar (talk) 02:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I see that you are at it again. You decided to impose the confusing and unsuitable for Misplaced Pages MLA style on February 2. You did not ask for consensus from other editors. Citations from web sources and newspapers would be better dealt with in the more usual WP styles. With regards to the book sources which you have removed, I am actually awaiting the books from by University library, in fact I have an email right now saying taht one of them is in teh libarray on this campus. I shall collect it, read it and put in refrences as I see appropriate. Currently I have only a 3rd generation photocopy without page numbers which is why they were missing. I am putting an under construction and citation style notice on this article. Please do not waste your time writing a thousand words on every minor edit you make. It is tedious and pointless and shows that you sadly have a somewhat obsessive and anal nature. perhaps you should seek medical assistance. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Article style

I have removed the style template as no consensus was sought on placing it there. It is a tactic used by one disruptive editor who likes to take over articles and make them unreadable, by using an academic style which is designed for dead tree publication. The imposition of this style has made the notes and references twice as long as the article and very confusing to the average non-scholalry reader. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

The creator of the article used the last name citation style to begin with, but created errors in the formatting of the notes. "Works cited" is correct, as that is how the "References" had been done from the start (with the last name of the source keyed to an entry in the "References" list. If one does not know that Misplaced Pages itself uses "Works cited" format in many of its own illustrations in project pages for Misplaced Pages editing policies and guidelines, one can find that out by reading sections of WP:MOS pertaining to bibliographies. There is nothing confusing about the use of a "Works cited" format for average everyday readers who are more familiar with Misplaced Pages editing policies and guidelines.

(cont.) Moreover, attempting to make an article consistent in its citation and bibliographical format is an improvement to the article and not "disruptive"; the only disruptiveness that I have experienced relating to this article is in the responses to reasonable and carefully-explained edits. The citation format was MLA format before J. changed the format to citation templates that had errors and inconsistencies in them. Although one could do so, there is no reason for consensus for changing the citation format to APA format or Harvard referencing or to Misplaced Pages citation templates, given the way the creator of the article initially used quotations in the notes with last names of authors (with inconsistencies in a variety of places in the "references" (notes) and bibliographical entries ("Works cited"); the works in the "Works cited" are those cited initially by the creator of the article, with corrections to bibliographical information.

(cont.) If the current format is consistent and enables the readers (all readers) to verify the source citations (as it currently does). See Style guides for the template. Misplaced Pages allows the use of MLA Style citations with "Works cited" in its articles when it is appropriate for the subject (in this case art as it relates to politics), which it is appropriate for. See earlier explanations: the article subject is "Art and politics", not "Politics and art".

(cont.) If there had not been errors in the initial formatting of the citationsDiffs., and it had been possible to continue it, that could have been the case. But I elected to use a simpler method (used throughout Misplaced Pages) in subjects that relate the academic disciplines, in this case to Art history: Several of the source citations chosen by the creator of the article are from books, two in Italian. I placed "Sources?" when I realized that there were inconsistencies in the source citation format and missing citations; there were templates indicating that prior to my formulating a consistent citation format in the course of correcting the earliest errors (duplication of note numbers). Clearly, the creator of the article did not know how to formulate source citations in numbered notes.Diffs. Please see editing policies in WP:LOP, including Misplaced Pages:Consensus, and related guidelines WP:MOS#Further reading, Misplaced Pages:Layout, WP:CITE; Cf. User talk:Jezhotwells#Art and politics. Thank you. --NYScholar (talk) 20:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I am restoring the template indicating the current Style Sheet, because that is the recommendation ("Please do not change these settings unless consensus has been reached."); when there is a current style sheet being followed, one indicates what it is, so that editors understand that one is attempting consistency in following it. Consensus operates over time. I attempted to follow the "works cited" format selected by the creator of the article by naming the "References" list what it was (a "Works cited") and correcting the errors in the duplicating of note numbers, using a "Notes" section. This is consistent with Misplaced Pages citation style guidelines and MLA Style format. --NYScholar (talk) 20:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

See Diffs. in editing history for context. The note in the Style Sheet about not changing it is clear; it is based on WP:CITE guidelines about not changing consistent citation style format to inconsistent style format and not changing a consistent style to another one for mere personal preferences. --NYScholar (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

You decided, you elected. Consensus has not been established. The MLA style means readeers have to check 2 places to actually get to the source material online. The use of long quotations makes the reference / note section far too long, longer than the article. Removed style templates as there is no consensus. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think you understand the process of "consensus" in Misplaced Pages; please see Misplaced Pages:Consensus. MLA Style is consistently used and acceptable in Misplaced Pages for subjects like this one. Both Art and Art history are academic disciplines. The creator of the article provided quotations; I followed that format. The creator of this article did not use citation templates. The Style format for notes and bibliographical references had errors in it; I corrected them and adapted the confused use of APA Style (author date; with erroneous pres. of dates of publication in cases) to a consistent use of MLA Style (author page); page refs. given by the creator of the article have been incorporated in the notes. I avoided using in-text parenthetical refs. out of deference to Jezhotwells and incorporated the information in the notes. Notes had been used by the creator of the article, but there were missing citations and erroneous or missing information from the bibliographical entries. I found the missing ISBN nos. and supplied them. There is one place for verification: the "Works cited" list. There is no need to supply the verifying sources twice (once in the notes and once in the "Works cited" ). MLA Style is an accepted style format in Misplaced Pages: see Style guide template. The fact that the Style Sheet template enables one to choose MLA Style (for subjects in "the arts and humanities") is evidence of that. --NYScholar (talk) 21:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Added some convenience links out of deference to above user's apparent desire for them. They are not necessary, but they are perhaps useful in the notes to which I added them. The "Works cited" provides sources for verification. Misplaced Pages editing policy is WP:V. The "Works cited" format with ISBN nos. and/or links to Web sources/resources is consistent with the requirement in Misplaced Pages for verifiability. Everything in this article has been checked and verified as of today. --NYScholar (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

You are the edit warrer, pal. Fine you have won - for the moment. I am working on a good article for this space and I will add material when I have it all in order. Till then you can carry on fiddling about.Jezhotwells (talk) 23:29, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics