I’m not a Wikipedia author. I have an account but I’m rarely logged in. But I have made quite a few edits in Wikipedia (mostly German but also English). Most minor, some bigger ones, and I have even created pages (four, one of which was deleted). My takeaway:
Fixing minor typos is very easy and everybody is happy about it.
Adding references to well-known sources almost always works. I added links to Gallup polls to a page about the Trump presidency and it went thru fine. No politics issues.
Adding section with additional information will only go thru if you follow a lot of guidelines but if you are lucky someone will fix it up later.
Adding pages is possible but it has to be about something of general and wider interest. That depends on the subject. And it depends on the context. If there are already multiple missing links to that page it will be easy. If not less so. Knowing this, when I tried to add a page about an artist (my late father-in-law) I first created that context—the institutions he worked at. And then created the page with all the cross-links. The page was still deleted—albeit after some discussion with 3rd parties also arguing for it to stay. The institutions stayed and got more links over time though.
You can learn a lot from trying and from the discussions.
If there are already multiple missing links to that page it will be easy. If not less so. Knowing this, when I tried to add a page about an artist (my late father-in-law) I first created that context—the institutions he worked at.
While missing links can be helpful, it’s not central. When thinking about creating a page about a person it makes sense to first read the section in notability:people that applies.
In the case of artists its:
Authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, and other creative professionals:
The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors.
The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique.
The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
The person’s work (or works) has: (a) become a significant monument, (b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) been represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums.
So when creating an article about an artist you have to search for sources that demonstrate either of those points.
Yes, I know. From the talk page. The rules have been sharpened a bit since then. But there are borderline cases. My father-in-law was cited by peers—but how widely? It was in the news—but too regional ones. He originated a new art technique and created quite a body of published work (10000s of pages)- albeit in the form of book-on-demand which was not considered widely enough. There have been multiple exhibitions—even cited in the news, but not beyond Germany. It was grey.
I didn’t write it just for your information, but for the case that someone reads through the thread and wants a better understanding of how things work.
I’m not a Wikipedia author. I have an account but I’m rarely logged in. But I have made quite a few edits in Wikipedia (mostly German but also English). Most minor, some bigger ones, and I have even created pages (four, one of which was deleted). My takeaway:
Fixing minor typos is very easy and everybody is happy about it.
Adding references to well-known sources almost always works. I added links to Gallup polls to a page about the Trump presidency and it went thru fine. No politics issues.
Adding section with additional information will only go thru if you follow a lot of guidelines but if you are lucky someone will fix it up later.
Adding pages is possible but it has to be about something of general and wider interest. That depends on the subject. And it depends on the context. If there are already multiple missing links to that page it will be easy. If not less so. Knowing this, when I tried to add a page about an artist (my late father-in-law) I first created that context—the institutions he worked at. And then created the page with all the cross-links. The page was still deleted—albeit after some discussion with 3rd parties also arguing for it to stay. The institutions stayed and got more links over time though.
You can learn a lot from trying and from the discussions.
While missing links can be helpful, it’s not central. When thinking about creating a page about a person it makes sense to first read the section in notability:people that applies.
In the case of artists its:
So when creating an article about an artist you have to search for sources that demonstrate either of those points.
Yes, I know. From the talk page. The rules have been sharpened a bit since then. But there are borderline cases. My father-in-law was cited by peers—but how widely? It was in the news—but too regional ones. He originated a new art technique and created quite a body of published work (10000s of pages)- albeit in the form of book-on-demand which was not considered widely enough. There have been multiple exhibitions—even cited in the news, but not beyond Germany. It was grey.
I didn’t write it just for your information, but for the case that someone reads through the thread and wants a better understanding of how things work.