User talk:C56C

From Wikiquote
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Hi C56C. Welcome to English Wikiquote.

Enjoy! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 10:04, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Kent Hovind[edit]

I have nominated for deletion your article on Kent Hovind because it is not a quote article, and Wikiquote articles are exclusively for quotes. Please read the help links provided in the above welcome message and browse random articles for examples. If you have some quotes from Hovind, please replace the current prose about his views with these quotes, preferably sourced by reliable publications. Thank you for your cooperation. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Jeff I cleaned up the Kent Hovind article and hopefully you can reconsidered your vote with the new improvements. C56C 23:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

That's a very good start. I see five remaining problems:

  1. There are still some statements like "Hovind claims". Quotes should consist of 2 main pieces, the quote and the source, like so:
  2. As suggested by the above example, source lines should be on a secondary bulleted line, to separate the source information clearly from the quote, and to make the quote prominent. We have stopped using quote marks around quotations, as do many quote compendia, precisely because the quote is expected to be exactly the original words.
  3. I found, in a random testing of links, that some either didn't work or didn't provide the actual quotes.
  4. Some of the source information is not specific enough to make it reasonable for other editors to verify accuracy. The purpose of sourcing quotes is to allow verification by readers, so sources should be described in a way that makes the source readily locatable. The titles, authors (in the case of works citing quotes from the subject), publisher and/or overall work, dates, and reference numbers (like ISBNs, issue numbers, etc.) should be given whenever possible. (Many of your citations are most of the way there, but there could be some improvement, like providing titles or descriptions of sound clips, and naming the sources instead of requiring the readers to deduce them from the URL.)
  5. Sources must also be reliable, as the Wikimedia Foundation defines it. That is, they must be published by respectable organzations in some reasonable form for researchers to examine. Books, magazines, and well-respected websites are best; videos and sound clips are okay, but transcriptions should be cited whenever possible.

More information on the standard formats for quote articles can be found at Wikiquote:Templates; in this case, especially Wikiquote:Templates/People. There should be no attempts to interpret someone's words, nor should their words be represented in third-person. (There is an occasion need to provide the context of a quote, but we must be careful not to use context lines to include unsourced opinions.) More information on sourcing can be found at Wikiquote:Citing sources.

Despite these issues, I believe you have made the case for keeping this article. At this point, it's mostly a matter of cleanup. Thank you very much for the fast work! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:46, 22 July 2006 (UTC)