User talk:Olexchest

Hello, Olexchest! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Zujua (talk) 23:37, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hi again - I took a quick look, basically yes, you understood what I meant. I would like to put your refs into "proper" citation format but I can't do that right now. It's been a busy time for me, I'll try to get back to it soon, but if you don't hear from me within a week or 10 days please leave me another note!

On second thought—I will do one of them now, so you can see what I mean. — Martha (talk) 20:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, I did that - I know there is a way to use <ref name=(whatever you want to call it> so you don't have to repeat the whole thing every time you use a particular reference, but I couldn't make it work today and need to go on to something else.

I will send you a "friend" request on Facebook. I wish I could give more time to your article, but I'm busy with a lot of other things too. —Martha (talk) 21:15, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Olexchest

The Galyna Zubchenko article was posted on the GOCE's Request page last December([1]) – all too prematurely, in my opinion. Anyway, I've just accepted to copy-edit it. As many sources are in Russian or Ukrainian, I'll be probably leaving lots of questions on the article's talk page and inlines – hope you won't mind. Please feel free to correct or revert any changes you disagree with or to contact me. Best, --CocoLacoste talk 06:10, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I've left an identical message on Martha's talk.

PS 2, Thanks for creating such an interesting article

Ok, feel free with corrections, I will do all, what need.

Olexchest (talk) 07:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC) So have question about citation. I do something what you asked and advised, so as Martha was. But if tell about "literature" I don't make citation from all of this. Reason is I listed all known for me sources, where tell about Galyna Zubchenko (really not all but main). But many of this sources tell about same things, especially monumental period. So I see no reason to give 2 and more citations about one event from different sources. If your opinion is different, please, tell me.[reply]

Olexchest (talk) 09:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Olex

I'm working on the article at this very moment. I agree, you don't need to cite two sources for the same thing (although the more sources, the better), but my question was about a source that appears as a book but links to a PDF. And that's wrong, that's why I asked if this PDF was a shorter version of the book. If this is the case, it should be a "cite web". Best, --CocoLacoste talk 09:33, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Understand. PDF is whole book, unfortunatly. I think we can remove this from "citation" (direct link) but remain in "literature", therefore who'll want to see book could do it.

No, it wouln't be wise to remove it because it links to a direct quote that is in the article ("Carpathians are my inner, in the dreams, world. Since childhood I have lived as if in two dimensions: the ancient, in times of Kievan Rus, and in the present. I was attracted to this ancient past, and in Kiev, I, unfortunately, could not find it. And here, in these mountains, I felt the spirit of ancient Kiev: in the houses, clothing, even in the words – all manifest our history ..."[3]). Besides, there's no problem because that PDF appears as an inline citation (see the 3 after it).

There seems to be a problem with the difference between Notes and References: the first section is a list of all the footnotes that have been inserted into the text (inline citations), while the other is the record of the sources (online or not) used to create the article. If you're quoting books, the page number has to be specified in Notes but not in References, where you simply have to write the details about each book, like this

Smith, John. This Wonderful Book. London: Thames & Hudson, 2011. ISBN (ISBN number). This article (Ghent Altarpiece)is a good example. Oh, one more thing: from a cursory look, I think you've provided links to online bookshops for a couple of books. There's no need to do this

Olexchest (talk) 09:44, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And one else. I put citation to http://www.pl.com.ua/?pid=56&artid=22944 in text. But this link shows not only she's works, but other peoples also. This was a reason why I not put it in original text. If who don't know language can think, that all of this is she's. You yhink it's good enough? It's trouble me a little.

Yes, it is confusing for someone who can't read Ukranian (me, for example). I thought it was all about her work when I first saw it, oops. Still, you can put it in the External links subsection at the bottom of the page. By the way, is that a newspaper?

Please let me know if my changes so far haven't altered the meaning of the text. Cheers, --CocoLacoste talk 11:50, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Olexchest (talk) 09:49, 11 January 2013 (UTC) This is online edition, portal, not paper newspaper. She's work in this article can be found by "Галина Зубченко", in Ctrl+F. 60% in this article her's, else not.[reply]

" I think you've provided links to online bookshops for a couple of books." - in russian wiki force me to do it. If it's don't needed we can put it away. About meaning - all is correct, I think. You put some inline comments, in this comments I also replay for some questions.

Olexchest (talk) 12:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re: inline comments: you're right, "Christian" is enough – I didn't know about those differences among Orthodox branches, just the Russian/Greek distinction. Ignorant me!

I'll remove the external links for the books, then. But could you please add the authors' names (in full, not just the initials), and the missing places of publication, publishers and ISBNs? Another thing, Artanіya is something like an art magazine, right? If so, we have to specify the month of publication too.

Last thing (sorry for being such a nuisance): is "Зубченко Галина Олександрівна" the Ukrainian article and "Зубченко, Галина Александровна" the Russian one? I'm thinking of doing a Google translation – awful, I know, though a bit helpful sometimes – into English and Spanish to see if we can get something from those Wikis. Cheers, --CocoLacoste talk 15:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS, Just a thought, what about putting any comment or question on the article's talk page from now on? That way, it'll be there for all to see. You OK with that?

Ok, I will answer on articl's talk page.

Olexchest (talk) 17:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - as I just wrote to Cocolacoste:

Thank you VERY MUCH, Cocacoste, for taking this on. I was actually "just dabbling" in it (and I have interest in Things Slavic)—but I did not feel competent to really do the job properly. I look forward to seeing how the article shapes up. (Olexchest, I was worried that I had maybe promised you something I could deliver. But feel free to contact me if you want to.) — Martha (talk) 20:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Olexchest. Please, don't write all your questions as inlines, or else it'll be confusing for other editors. Use the talk page, yeah?

I'll get back to you later and explain the changes I've made. Cheers, --CocoLacoste talk 14:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I really do such a way? Awfully sorry, it seemed to me many questions were on talk page. Anyway not a problem, I will not.

Olexchest (talk) 19:49, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Olexchest,

I've finished the copy-edit. I put a couple of "citation needed" tags because everything on Wikipedia has to be backed up by sources. Re: the Museum of the Sixties, there's no need to scan that document, but try to find if the Museum has an official site where this information appears, or an article in a newspaper. If not, leave the info but don't remove the tags. I've left a note on WP:UKRAINE's talk to see if someone can help you to improve the article – I can't do this, partly because the sources are in Ukrainian or Russian and I can't read those languages. Glad to see you've found some sources in English, but try to use them as inline quotes instead of external links.

On WP:UKRAINE's main page there's a list of bilingual users. Maybe you can contact them asking if they can step in — look for active ones. You can tell this by looking at their user talk pages. Cheers, --CocoLacoste talk 00:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS, try to be a bit more careful when you write on the article's talk page and indent your comments – this way, the page is neat. (not a telling-off, just a friendly advice, eh?).

Hi, me again

Sorry if I bore the pants off you but, as the page is still on my watchlist, I can see when it gets changed. Thing is, you've put external links in the body of the article when they generally should be avoided – see Wikipedia:External links. Do as you see fit, of course, but I suggest you use the cite web templates, just as you did with ref. 13.

If you have questions, you can ask at the Teahouse, that place's chock-full of friendly people offering help. cheers, --CocoLacoste talk 17:00, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I'll edit the article's talk later so that you see the difference between indents and bulleted lists – don't worry: getting the hang of editing takes some time, but it's good to explore a bit and see how things are done.

Ok, I am sorry, I want to replace this external links by citations when come home, but you write me earlier, then I come )

Olexchest (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked it over pretty carefully, I see that you and CocoLacoste went through a lot of long discussions about it. Well, they "paid off" as we say in English, the article is looking very nice now. Best, Martha (talk) 02:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]