Talk:Caridad de la Luz

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Sarason in topic Photos

Citation style

edit

The citation style used throughout the article is a bit haphazard; it's consistent, but it's not really the best that can be done. Converting to citation templates would make it a bit easier to keep things formatted correctly, but there are other ways to do this as well. It would also make it easier to clean up WP:DEADREFs and citations to non-English sources because there are some of these in the article as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:39, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

I've gone an converted the citations to using citation templates. The same style of presenting the information about each source can also be achieved without using template, but it's a little bit trickier to keep the formatting of each citation consistent without using templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:40, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Tone

edit

There's a bit of MOS:PUFFERY and other promotion sounding text in the article which needs to be cleaned up. MOS:OPED type or words should also be avoided. Lastly, "Currently" doesn't seem to be a good name for a section heading per WP:RELTIME and it might be better to figure out something better. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:43, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • You are absolutely right. I myself removed what may be considered POV. However, I recommend tthat other editors when reviewing an article which they consider having POV material, to cooperate and remove them. It is quite easy to simply place a "tag" on an article when it is just as easy to make the required improvements, especially those with POV issues. This is a project where we all should cooperate as a group in improving not only the articles in the pedia, but Wikipedia in general. Tony the Marine (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
    • I appreciate you going through and cleaning things up a bit. I actually wasn't intending just to WP:TAGBOMB the article and leave things for someone else. I just couldn't do it myself at that particular time; so, I added the WP:TMC just to let others know about the problem. Anyway, I still think the "Currently" section should be renamed; it has the feel of a "Personal life" section for the most part and maybe the content about her workshop and being a spokesperson should be moved to another part of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:45, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Reply
      • You are right! I also agree on your observation regarding the "Currently" section. I believe that a section shouldn't even be titled that way since life is constantly in motion and therefore what is current now may change within the next second or so. I mean a person who reads an article a week from now may find a find a section named like that to be ridiculous if the subject in question has passed away. Later I shall re-name it. Tony the Marine (talk) 08:57, 7 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

Photos

edit

Re photos: I restored the original photo positions. This yields a cleaner look and much better visual balance. I see no discernible reason for jamming the photos on top of the video boxes, which clutters the right side of page. If there is a compelling reason, please share on this talk page. Thank you, Sarason (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2019 (UTC)Reply

The location of the photos isn't as much of a concern as their size. Images shouldn't really be forced to fit a particular size since not everyone will read the article using the same type of device. WP:THUMB allows the software to "size" the image according to the device it's being used on or the preferences for the user reading the article; fixing the size defeats both those things. If the images seem too small, then there are ways of adjusting the thumb syntax as explained in WP:IMAGESIZE which don't fix things to a particular number of pixels. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:13, 10 November 2019 (UTC)Reply