User talk:David Kaminsky
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Welcome!
Hello, David Kaminsky, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --DanielRigal (talk) 01:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Swedish folk music
Hi. I see that you are referencing Swedish folk music almost entirely from your own PHD thesis. This could lead to the article being considered original research or merely representing your personal opinion. In theory this could even cause the article to be proposed for deletion. May I suggest that you add references from other sources and make sure that the article reflects all the mainstream views of the subject, without giving excessive prominence to your own. Please note, that I am not accusing you of writing an opinion piece. I don't know enough about the subject to form a view either way. All I am saying is that only referencing yourself might tend to give that impression, whether or not it is actually the case. --DanielRigal (talk) 01:22, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] DYK
 |
On 17 April 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Swedish folk music, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
--Cirt (talk) 11:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Set
Please provide references for article Set (folk music) you created. Please see the most basic wikipedia rules about article content: Wikipedia:Attribution. `'Míkka>t 19:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Note from plskmn
Hi David. Welcome to the weird and wonderful world of wikipedia. It can be a shock at first for someone coming in from an academic background. On one hand you'll be pressed for sources. On the other pressed to be less formal and provide information in the form of a simpler encyclopedia article. You'll also find it to be a world with quite a lot of adamants--people and comments--some helpful and knowledgeable, some not. And all on a pretty equal footing! My academic area has zero to do with folk music or traditions; my avocational interests have everything to do with Swedish polska music and dance. So I am in the position to understand both sides of what may be some initial disorientation you may feel.
My own contribution has been primarily the article on polska. I wrote it about a year ago to replace what appeared to me to be a haphazard earlier effort. As an amateur I wrote it pretty much without citations or sources, based on informal conversations with relatively knowledgable folk music and dance teachers from Scandinavia over the years. It is far too long and detailed. It has not been vetted by anyone formally knowledgeable. It has, however, collected quite a collection of links to other related sites. If you wander around among them you will get a sense of what is out there and of the very difficult problem of 'organizing' the content area--that is, while I don't see 'polska' as providing a good model or a useful organization, I have not figured out how to edit it down, break it up, and in other ways fit it in with, or under other related articles. Hope your formal work in the area may help bring order over the long run!
I also saw your spelling fix on the 'Tradiditional Nordic....' page. That is a great article for scope, length, density of links (important wikipedia strengths). It is a terrible name for a general 'high in the tree' aritcle and, like 'polska' may or may not provide accurate information.
You also may also want to consider giving yourself an anonymous name for your work on wikipedia. There is not any prejudice against going that route. And since your work here will always be subject to random edits by anyone and every one and because you may want to keep your formal academic work separated from this more altruistic but uncontrollable format, it may well be a good idea. Go to the wikipedia page and track down a communication with the editors. I found them quite accomodating in changing my wikipedia ID over to a pseudonym, based on a staightforward request. They worry about people hiding IDs to make mischief, not those who have a legitimate desire to a keep their personal or professional privacy
