CLOSED CONTRIBUTIONS PROCESS ONLY
Due to inappropriate editing based on lack of understanding of the subject, all changes must be proposed here before implementation. Do not make changes to the article. Instead, propose your changes here on its Talk page.
A few notes:
It is appropriate to cite the cultural and linguistic relevance of a body of work for a group of hundreds of thousands of people.
Terms such as "Cherokee National Treasure" are awarded titles comparable to "MD" and "Nobel Prize-Winner". This is not emotionalistic language from an individual writer.
- Hi, this is a wiki, so you can't close the contribution process. I'm one of the most experienced WP editors and would very much like for us to have an article on Feeling. Right now, the draft has some problems that will prevent it from being published. I'm trying to get the draft ready for publication. FYI, we dont include any titles/awards in in article titles. So its appropriate to mention that he is a CNT, but not put it in the title. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
We need to have a conversation before you make changes. There are no problems with the article. There are no changes without discussion. Why have you thrown out the majority of an article without contacting the author first? What are your specific objections? Open edit requires respect, including the flagging and discussion of changes before making them. And who is "we"? I didn't change the article title change, by the way. I assumed it was better to link to other elements on other pages. Please PROPOSE your ideas and changes instead of just making them. Thank you.
Comment: This article needs wholesale rewriting before acceptance. There is extensive copying from sources in addition to the inappropriate use of primary sources/original research. I made significant edits to clean up the article but was reverted by the author. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Quoting is used to allow people to be heard in their own words expressing their professional assessment of Feeling's work. Paraphrasing is also used. Cites follow the AP Style common to scholarly research, meaning that quotes are quoted, paraphrases are attributed by the reference note at the end of the paragraph, and sometimes multiple sources require source differentiation, meaning that the same source is cited twice within a paragraph but over different sentences or words. All matter is published publicly and therefore can be quoted publicly. All sources are appropriate. Linking to other wiki pages is used liberally because readers may not be familiar with the historical background information that other readers already know.
Please stop making page edits to the article. If you have a specific concern, state it here on the Talk page. I'll review it.
For example, one scholarly flag might be that although we include professional opinions and book reviews from the most recent 20-year period in Feeling's career, the statements and scores are almost entirely positive or 100% of the possible score. The lowest book rating is 50%. We might think about the nature of timing (he's just died and people are nice), publication (predominantly positive), multiple awards (legitimate excellence), continuing work by others (expanding current relevance) and the nature of indigenous language and culture revitalization (there are fewer unaligned or orthogonal viewpoints in the audience of linguistic scholars, educators and indigenous people). Indigenous language and culture revitalization is extremely specific to the indigenous people, and in the sense of scholarly contribution, there may be an effect of an opening apogee on knowledge over time as the scholarly substance becomes better known. It's important to retain those connections in knowledge. Unaligned or orthogonal perspectives may develop over time. IMHO
- The basic problem with this article is that Wikipedia articles must summarize what reliable secondary sources say. (This is the function of an encyclopedia, as a tertiary source.) The only reliable secondary sources you have listed are the Osiyo TV piece and the Anadisgoi article. The article should therefore only summarize what these two sources say (plus whatever additional secondary sources say--i see obituaries in the Oklahoman, Tulsa World, the Cherokee Phoenix, and Tulsa Public Radio... these would be good sources). Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)