Noel A. Sherry

Hello Hollis, I think this is a way to communicate with you. So I have "dived in" to editing in Wikipedia, and covered a lot of ground. I will talk to you about what I have entered, with concern that I many have added TOO MUCH. I can edit it down, though I feel the material here is germane to the Frank Tweedy story. I can see what you said about the difference between a biography and an encyclopedia. The Doc I sent you had SO MUCH extraneous material- interesting to me and good if drafting a biography- but NOT for a Wikipedia article. So have have already edited way down, and can cut further.

I entered the map of Beaver Lake into Wikimedia Commons, but apparently I did not select a Copyright category allowing me to upload that into our article on Frank. I will work on getting that done. The only other illustration I would love to add would be one more from his Adirondack surveying, probably the illustration of Colvin's of "The Great Corner." But maybe we have enough illustrations already. What do you think?

I think I am picking up the Wikipedia "language". In several places I placed a link to another Internet source where it seemed appropriate. I was confused as to how to reference a repeat source, so may need to go back and revise that. I did use selected quotes, but shorter ones than in my article. Do I need to italicize quotes? Look over what I have entered and see what you think.

This was fun and satisfying to move closer to the goal. Regards, Noel

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Noel A. Sherry. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 14:38, 22 November 2020 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).

Hello, I need an experienced Wikipedian to read an entry I have posted titled "Frank Tweedy," to see if in your expert opinion I have edited it sufficiently so that it does not contain any "original research" elements. When first reviewed, the reviewer thought it might. I have edited it to try to remove any of those elements. Would love to get an outside opinion on this. Thanks Noel A. Sherry (talk) 02:00, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Frank Tweedy

Hi Noel, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! The Frank Tweedy article is a very nice addition. A question for you: Is the book The Life of Frank Tweedy: Confessions of a Tenderfoot available to the public anywhere? I'm concerned that some of the sources for the article Frank Tweedy may not be appropriate for an encyclopedia article (and would be more appropriate for an academic publication analyzing primary sources). Let me know! I'm making my way through the article to clean up some of the reference formatting and I see a few other potentially problematic sources that I may circle back to contact you about. Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello Calliopejen1, thanks for your feedback. This is my first Wikipedia entry, collaborating with a Botanist, Hollis Marriott. The source you mentioned was provided by a descendent of Frank Tweedy's, and though unpublished, is Frank's own mature reflection on his life and career. It thus becomes, in some ways, the "interpretive key" to his character and legacy, and to how he navigated and reflected on his career. I am working on transcribing this 71-page autobiography, and will request that it be permanently archived in a reputable website such as HathiTrust, or a Museum in Old Forge, NY, The Goodsell Museum. But I am open to feedback as this is my first try at writing for Wikipedia, and I have a lot to learn, particularly on the difference between an encyclopedia and a biography. Hollis and I are still editing, proof-reading, and cleaning up little things in the Frank Tweedy article. I have a series of five articles on Frank Tweedy pending publication with the New York Almanack, which I will link in with this article when ready.

Calliopejen1 (talk)- Hello Calliopejen1, I have carefully read through your comments and Wikipedia info related to the source you mentioned and I have done two things: (1) eliminated most of the material that was present earlier related to Frank Tweedy's short story collection and his autobiography. I retained two quotes from the autobiography in which Frank reflected on his life and career. (2) I have requested permission of Kate Tweedy who supplied me with Frank's autobiography to upload the original and a transcription I have done into WikiSource so that it is available publicly for study, reading, and as a source for an article like this. That permission is pending. Could you review the changes to see if these two things are adequate to address your concern? Thanks, Noel Noel A. Sherry (talk) 01:31, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Please maintain a formal tone

Howdy Noel, frankly I'm a little surprised you don't appear to have known this already, but please maintain a formal tone when expanding articles. I get that it's easy to get carried away when one is writing about a topic of personal interest and fascination, but sentences like Truly, another wonder of nature! aren't really compatible with this being an encyclopedia. Also, it would be nice if you could use edit summaries more often. Still, thank you for your contributions so far, and happy editing! AngryHarpy‍^talk 13:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Whoops, AngryHarpy, and thanks, I am new at this, and do maintain a list of "wonders of nature," so do get carried away. I will change this and am learning the difference between an editorial piece and an encyclopedia. Thanks again! Let me know if I need further "filtering" or erasures. Are the longer quotes acceptable? I will look into "edit summaries." This is the second article I have contributed to, and I have yet to write and submit my own article- I plan on that next. Peer review is welcomed. Noel A. Sherry (talk) 13:32, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Noel, that's great to hear, I'll have a look at your other edits a little later. Another small thing, though, please remember to sign your talk page posts by typing four successive tildes (~~~~) at the end of them—this will automatically insert your name, a link to your talk page and a time stamp. Thanks! AngryHarpy‍^talk 13:27, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again, I do listen to feedback, its how I learn, and this Wikipedia "language" for writing is like learning a new language. I like it. Noel A. Sherry (talk) 13:30, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Alright, I've had a look at your overall contributions to the Utricularia resupinata article using this comparative overview, here's some things I'd point out:

• All articles should have a lead (or lede if you're American) paragraph, which is then followed by the table of contents (which is inserted automatically if you have four or more subheadings) and then the first actual subheading. You have placed the first subheading directly below the infobox, leading to the article looking a little atypical. Generally, if you want guidance on basic formatting guidelines like this, you can use either the Manual of Style (MoS), its simplified and more accessible cousin, or almost any good or featured article as a cheat sheet, for example old Einstein here.
• Bold text is to be used sparingly in Wikipedia articles; if you want to emphasize something, either use italics or rewrite the sentence to make its meaning more explicit. As it stands, all instances of bold text in the article except for those in the very first sentence ought to be removed.
• Not being a biologist myself, the words "B.D. Greene ex Bigelow" mean nothing to me, which makes it a possible instance of MOS:JARGON. Of course, I'm woefully underqualified to help you with the technical intricacies of writing a good article about a plant, and I highly recommend you read through the article advice over at WikiProject Plants.
• A minor point is your occasional use of double hyphens, em-dashes (—) or spaced en-dashes ( – ) are preferred. I usually produce them with Alt+0150 and Alt+0151, but there's also a row of buttons for special characters below the source editor.
• Your two lengthier direct quotations should be within guidelines, but your uncertainty is certainly justified. For further reference, I recommend the quotation guidelines for a fairly concise summary with plenty of related links. I'd also use <blockquote> tags or the quote template.
• Subheadings should be typed in sentence case rather than title case.

These are some points of basic advice I'd give you, though I think you've already done quite an excellent job at figuring things out on your own. This place can be pretty daunting, especially to newcomers, and even I, a grizzled veteran with almost sixteen months of experience under my wiki belt will occasionally stumble upon an obscure guideline or policy I hadn't heard of before (<-- irony). You've probably noticed I've threaded this conversation by placing an increasing number of colons ahead of every reply, which is just another minor thing you couldn't have possibly known about, and that's basically how it's going to go from here on out, you'll just pick things up as you go along. Don't be discouraged should someone ever yell at you, and thanks for turning Utricularia resupinata into something much more substantial. AngryHarpy‍^talk 18:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Wow, AHarpy, this is very detailed and helpful, and I know you did read my article and offer good a advice for changes and for further info. I appreaciate that and will work this through over the next week point by point. I am actually not a botanist but I have a botanist mentoring and tutoring me on the science part, so that helps. My first experiences with Wikipedia mean I like it and so have ideas for doing more going ahead. Saving your helpful info. Noel A. Sherry (talk) 20:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Desmodium tweedyi has been accepted

Desmodium tweedyi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Gpkp [u • t • c] 07:20, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Congrats, way to go! AngryHarpy‍^talk 17:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Nuphar lutea, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages APG and Magnoliidae. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)