Talk:Daniel Belardinelli

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daniel Belardinelli. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131203002828/http://www.outsiderartfair.com/pdfs/artnewspaper_oaf_2013.pdf to http://www.outsiderartfair.com/pdfs/artnewspaper_oaf_2013.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:37, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

911 non-event

How is that nonsense related to a legitimate biography? He was fine and in no danger at any time. He was nowhere close to death. "Nearly killed?" How about "almost got on a plane"? Talk about sensationalism! Toddst1 (talk) 02:13, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps it was a poor choice of wording but the incident wasvrelevant to the his work which is explained in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camimack (talk • contribs) 04:49, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

How and why is it relevant? Because he made a picture? Toddst1 (talk) 21:20, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

From all the research I did back then I gathered he was able to hear the FBI tapes because he was family (to deceased uncle Cashman), and this lead to him to illustrating book covers in addition to his usual outsider art aka art brut original pieces. You have far more experience in Wikipedia than I. I wish I had notated more back when I had the time to write. I'm not in this for arguments. Outsider art is just something I know about and wanted to contribute. Do what you think is best. I tried to include as much as I could as accurately as I was able. Thanks Camimack (talk) 00:11, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

COI

This article reeks of WP:COI participation. That the primary author has edited no articles at all unrelated to this subject in the 3+ years s/he has been building this article, and the sensationalism used in the prose say it all.

@Camimack: If you are connected to the artist, you should declare it here. If you want to use a template to do this on this page, place {{connected contributor}} at the top of this talk page, fill it in as follows, and save:

Connected contributor template
{{Connected contributor|User1=Your username |U1-declared=yes| U1-otherlinks=(Optional) Insert relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts or diffs showing COI contributions.}}

Toddst1 (talk) 02:18, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

No coi Camimack (talk) 01:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok so I'm adding a connected contributor template because there is evidence from your contribution history that you have more than an outsiders access to information about Belardinelli. I don't think the article itself needs to have a {{coi}} template, as the article is pretty well sourced and pretty well NPOV, but it should have a connected contributor. -- GreenC 14:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

BTW if you are using multiple accounts to edit WIkipedia that is a serious offense and can get you permanently banned, see WP:SOCK. Suggest you use an account name and stick with it. Abandon your other accounts immediately. Find an administrator and come clean with them in private so they can help you. Otherwise you will get caught (IP logs are available), anyone can request an investigation for multiple account abuse. -- GreenC 14:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I was intrigued by the this art in particular and outsider art/art brut and thus created the page taking pains to add appropriate sources to make my first contribution as encyclopedic as possible. I did attend a showing and met the artist long after creating the article. I advised a family member of what happened with the unfair labeling of conflict of interest and that person is dartslover. No problem with them abandoning their account. Thank you for removing the label. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camimack (talk • contribs) 04:33, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

No userbox?

@Camimack: you've reverted the addition of an infobox several times now (see WP:EW). What the heck are you doing? Have you read Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes? What's your beef there? @Boomer Vial:. @Denisarona: and @ZappaOMati: have restored it. Your continued removal smacks of WP:OWNership of the article. Toddst1 (talk) 03:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Toddst1 I also am completely confused as to their intentions. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 03:41, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I have read your comments and thank you for the educational materials. I was unaware of some of the policies and how my actions were being perceived. As far as the infobox goes, I had developed the original early on with verified facts and a photo but recently updated the article with new information and a photo. I removed the original info box because I made it a bit long and most of the information was already in the article so I thought it best removed because it was redundant. If other editors feel the infobox is necessary please correct the date of birth at least. I don't own this article but I do try to keep it as accurate and concise as I am able, and yes, I'm aware I can also make errors. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Camimack (talk • contribs) 05:00, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

How can we verify his date of birth? Toddst1 (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

I never thought to put a footnote for proof of a date of birth of all things, sorry. I do not remember at this point where I found it and do not currently have the time to search for it again. Perhaps ask why it was changed as I am certain it had to be an accident. I will search again when I have time if you wish. Camimack (talk) 23:11, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

It's clearly in dispute, which is why I'm asking. WP:BLP pretty much requires it anyway. Toddst1 (talk) 21:22, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Derivative

I say we delet this, who cares about some random painter who missed his flight. 2601:244:180:2610:5DFD:5C3A:4638:6162 (talk) 02:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)