Hi Un assiolo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse.
Have you edited here on Wikipedia in the past using a different username or account? You seem to have learned very quickly. Happy editing! Netherzone ( talk) 17:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Please don't make protection request reports for cases of simple vandalism that can be handled via a block; see our protection policy. We only protect pages for vandalism if the vandalism can't be easily handled via warnings and blocks. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for message. I'm not sure what your interest in Kim Tschang-Yeul is, since as far as I can see you have never edited it. If you have a conflict of interest regarding this article you must declare it.
I did read the talk page. There is speculation there that the apparently copied page was copied from here, but nothing to support that, so I think the deletion is justified, but in any case the article is unsatisfactory. It was the G12 SD tag that attracted my attention, but G11 advertising would also have been appropriate.
When one writes about a person, they must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls. Most of the text was completely unsourced, and the few refs that were there were mostly either unsuitable, like YouTube, non-refs like "Ronny Cohen: Tschang Yeul Kim" or don't say what they are supposed to be verifying. For example the source for the highest honor bestowed upon a living Korean artist. doesn't say anything of the kind. Basically, the vast majority of the text is completely unverified.
Articles must be written in a non-promotional tone. They must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews. Unsourced claims presented as fact include; one of the most influential figures in modern Korean art history... his own unique style of painting... With time, the liquid abstract forms transformed into spherical, transparent, "hyperreal" 'water drops'... Kim’s water drop paintings speak a language that amalgamates the discourses around photorealism and abstract expressionism, situated in an ambiguous space between reality and the abstract... the highest honor bestowed upon a living Korean artist... Kim is considered the artist that inspired monochrome painting in Korea, as well as being one of the most influential Korean masters in contemporary art in the West... he was awarded with the Commandeur medal, the highest honor of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres... and so on. Even if it was referenced, it's a mishmash of personal opinions, personal reviews and (unsourced) supposed quotes from the artist, who is not an independent third-party source.
He's clearly notable, but this isn't an encyclopaedia article. At best it's a fan page, at worse there is considerable COI editing here. An article a quarter of the length with proper references and real facts is what we need, not unsourced opinions. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello Un assiolo. Thanks for your support on the article Gagan Gupta. As I'm not fully used to english community functionning, I didn't understood what the next step was. As the article has been undeleted, should the text be restored waiting for the Drv ? Regards, Rastapeuplulos ( talk) 14:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi Un assiolo, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse.
Have you edited here on Wikipedia in the past using a different username or account? You seem to have learned very quickly. Happy editing! Netherzone ( talk) 17:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Please don't make protection request reports for cases of simple vandalism that can be handled via a block; see our protection policy. We only protect pages for vandalism if the vandalism can't be easily handled via warnings and blocks. OhNoitsJamie Talk 15:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for message. I'm not sure what your interest in Kim Tschang-Yeul is, since as far as I can see you have never edited it. If you have a conflict of interest regarding this article you must declare it.
I did read the talk page. There is speculation there that the apparently copied page was copied from here, but nothing to support that, so I think the deletion is justified, but in any case the article is unsatisfactory. It was the G12 SD tag that attracted my attention, but G11 advertising would also have been appropriate.
When one writes about a person, they must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls. Most of the text was completely unsourced, and the few refs that were there were mostly either unsuitable, like YouTube, non-refs like "Ronny Cohen: Tschang Yeul Kim" or don't say what they are supposed to be verifying. For example the source for the highest honor bestowed upon a living Korean artist. doesn't say anything of the kind. Basically, the vast majority of the text is completely unverified.
Articles must be written in a non-promotional tone. They must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews. Unsourced claims presented as fact include; one of the most influential figures in modern Korean art history... his own unique style of painting... With time, the liquid abstract forms transformed into spherical, transparent, "hyperreal" 'water drops'... Kim’s water drop paintings speak a language that amalgamates the discourses around photorealism and abstract expressionism, situated in an ambiguous space between reality and the abstract... the highest honor bestowed upon a living Korean artist... Kim is considered the artist that inspired monochrome painting in Korea, as well as being one of the most influential Korean masters in contemporary art in the West... he was awarded with the Commandeur medal, the highest honor of the Ordre des Arts et des Lettres... and so on. Even if it was referenced, it's a mishmash of personal opinions, personal reviews and (unsourced) supposed quotes from the artist, who is not an independent third-party source.
He's clearly notable, but this isn't an encyclopaedia article. At best it's a fan page, at worse there is considerable COI editing here. An article a quarter of the length with proper references and real facts is what we need, not unsourced opinions. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello Un assiolo. Thanks for your support on the article Gagan Gupta. As I'm not fully used to english community functionning, I didn't understood what the next step was. As the article has been undeleted, should the text be restored waiting for the Drv ? Regards, Rastapeuplulos ( talk) 14:42, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review
the candidates and submit your choices on the
voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{
NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 01:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)