Revision as of 15:58, 18 August 2012 editShawn à Montréal (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers158,726 editsm →Advert← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 20:05, 16 November 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,534,509 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 2 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages with redundant living parameter)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion | ||
(158 intermediate revisions by 25 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ |
{{Talkheader}} | ||
{{American English}} | |||
{{WikiProject Biography | |||
{{Old AfD multi | |||
|living=yes | |||
|date=12 March 2013 (UTC)|result='''Speedy keep'''|page=Nat Gertler | |||
|class=Stub | |||
|date2=13 March 2014 (UTC)|result2='''Keep'''|page2=Nat Gertler (2nd nomination) | |||
|a&e-priority=low | |||
|a&e-work-group=yes | |||
|listas=Gertler, Nat | |||
|needs-photo=yes | |||
}} | }} | ||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=Start|listas=Gertler, Nat|1= | ||
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=low|a&e-work-group=yes}} | |||
{{Notable Wikipedian|NatGertler|editedhere=yes}} | |||
{{WikiProject Comics|importance=low|Creators-work-group=yes|US-work-group=yes|DC-work-group=yes}} | |||
}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| algo = old(730d) | |||
| archive = Talk:Nat Gertler/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| counter = 1 | |||
| maxarchivesize = 125K | |||
| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | |||
| minthreadstoarchive = 2 | |||
| minthreadsleft = 6 | |||
}} | |||
{{Notable Wikipedian|NatGertler|editedhere=yes|declared=yes|otherlinks=Declared ].}} | |||
== Conflict of Interest edit requests == | |||
{{edit COI|A}} | |||
<!--Don't remove anything above this line.--> | |||
Three requested edits: | |||
* '''In opening sentence, ''including four on Charles Schulz's Peanuts.'' --''four'' should be changed to ''six''. ''': | |||
== No Factor in Deserving Recognition? == | |||
* '''Since the last updating of that sentence, two additional books have been published, ''Be My Charlie Brown'' and ''Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects''''': | |||
* '''References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button)''': , | |||
*Last sentence of intro, ''Gertler made a guest appearance on the comic review show Atop The Fourth Wall as himself.'' should be deleted due to its trivial nature. (If you want a Misplaced Pages reason to delete it, it's an unsourced statement in a BLP. It's ''true'', mind you, but unsourced, and not a lead-worthy item. I've made appearances on/in many things.) | |||
*At bottom of ''Selected works: Books'' section, add: ''Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects'' (written with Benjamin L. Clark and ]), ], 2022 ({{isbn|9781681888606}})<ref>{{cite news|title=New 'Peanuts' archival book released by Schulz Museum|url=https://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/entertainment/new-peanuts-archival-book-released-by-schulz-museum/|first=Dan|last=Taylor|publisher=Press Democrat|date=November 2, 2022}}</ref> | |||
My interest in correcting misstatements is in conflict with the inappropriateness of editing my own entry -- but let me point out that the Eisner Award for Talent Deserving Wider Recognition goes to the individual not the work. While "The Factor" was pretty clearly the work that inspired that nomination, it was I, not "The Factor", who was nominated (and ultimately beaten by Bendis). If someone can verify this information in whatever manner is appropriate and correct it, I'd appreciate it! | |||
: | |||
] (]) |
] (]) 01:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC) | ||
<!--Don't remove anything below this line--> | |||
{{reftalk}} | |||
:] '''Done''' <!-- Template:ECOI --> ] (]) 02:44, 18 December 2022 (UTC) | |||
== New photo available == | |||
* Done! ]/<small>(]) </small> 02:47, 23 March 2008 (UTC) | |||
] I have made a more recent photo available for use. | |||
== my current website == | |||
⚫ | I leave it up to others whether this should be included. --] (]) 19:09, 3 December 2022 (UTC) | ||
== Updating for new Eisner Award nomination == | |||
I note that the article is using my old website (gertler.com/nat/) as a reference. That website grew quite outdated; I now have an up-to-date website at which has more current info, credits, and a fuller biography, and thus may make a better source from here on in. --] (]) 22:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
::thanks Nat! ]/<small>(]) </small> 13:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC) | |||
⚫ | |||
{{edit COI|ans=y}} | |||
== Mighty Murdered Power Ringer? == | |||
* In the intro, update ''He has been nominated for two Eisner Awards.'' to ''three Eisner Awards.'' | |||
* At the end of the "Awards and nominations" list, add ''2023 Eisner Award nomination: Best Comics-Related Book ''Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects'' by Benjamin L. Clark and Nat Gertler<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.comic-con.org/awards/eisner-awards-current-info|title=Eisner Awards Current Info|website=comic-con.org|date=May 17, 2023}}</ref> | |||
Thanks! -- ] (]) 17:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC) ] (]) 17:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
I noticed on AT4W that Nat wrote said comic as "Nigel Ing." Is this okay to add the Comica on this page | |||
{{ref talk}} | |||
<span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 16:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
===Reply 28-JUN-2023=== | |||
{{border |]{{nbsp|2}}'''Unable to implement'''{{nbsp|2}}|display=table |width=1px |style=double |style2=dotted |color=black |lh=1}} | |||
* The specifically nominated Eisner Award's ] has not been included with the request. Please provide the Wikilink to the award's Misplaced Pages page. | |||
<span style="font-size:75%;border:3px solid red;border-radius:60px">]</span> 01:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
:{{ping|spintendo}} I am missing how that is at all needed to implement the change. That specific category does not yet have a Misplaced Pages page. I cannot make said page because of an obvious ]. -- ] (]) 05:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC) | |||
== Photo needed == | |||
::Never mind. Given that this edit has been requested on the Talk page for over a month with no objection to its content (and only a nonsensical one to its formatting), that it includes a sourced correction, and that it contains nothing out of nature with the article as it existed, I have gone ahead and made the edit, despite my ] (Even if we are to accept the concept that it ''should'' include a wikilink to a non-existent page,. requested edits should not be rejected simply for not being ''perfect''; they should only be rejected for not being ''improvements'', much as with any other edit.) -- ] (]) 06:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::And just to make sure I'm meeting every requirement where I can: My conflict of interest with regard to this article is that I am its subject. -- ] (]) 15:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
::::Sorry for the late reply, I don't get pings when I use my cell phone. With regards to your question, by their very nature, awards can be subjective, in that they represent a very specific point of view: that of the individual or organization which determines who wins the award and why. To counter this, a good approach is to limit the listing of awards to only those which are independently notable in Misplaced Pages. What I'm asking for is ''not'' due to ] (which I need not remind you, is not a content requirement). The request for notability in this case is to ensure ]. The adding of several points of view to an article in the form of non-notable awards may skew an article's ].<ref>{{cite web |title=WP:BALANCE |url=https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Balance |website=Misplaced Pages |language=en |date=20 July 2019 |quote=...articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects.}}</ref> Thus, this reviewer's own practice is to limit the listing of awards to those which are independently notable in Misplaced Pages. It's all right if you have difficulty understanding this—having a COI is similar to a blind spot, which prevents a person from recognizing interests which may be conflicted. I don't believe that the request that I made of you asking for the award to be notable in Misplaced Pages is anything out of the ordinary. Say 6 months from now, the award gets its own page. No harm done. But for some, that wait may seem like an eternity. Is that FOMO occurring in someone's own article—I doubt it, but it wouldn't be beyond the realm of possibility. I just try to do my best. Regards, <span style="font-size:85%;border:3px solid red;border-radius:15px">]</span> 06:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::::While the specific category does not have a page, the Eisner Awards were ''already linked'' on the page, and thus should not have been linked again for overlinking. You could have noticed that fairly easily, as my requested changes specifically included incrementing the number of nominations, indicating that the Eisners were already covered in the article. Or you could have taken less time than it took to respond to enter Eisner Awards into the search box to verify that the Awards do indeed have their own page. (Indeed, my previous Eisner nominations were considered of enough note that ]. This is not just a matter of "FOMO", whatever spin you may want to put on it; there was a no-longer accurate number sitting on the page. -- ] (]) 12:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
::::::I think your ideas on what could have reasonably been done to expedite the request are a terrific start, and much appreciated. When presented with what seemed to you to be an interminable delay, you could have said to yourself, "You know what? That's fine. It can wait. I feel okay with it not happening now, because I know having distance between me and the article is not the opposite of good. This isn't a rush job, and when it happens, it happens." A very idyllic response which unfortunately did not occur. You would brook no such delays. You wanted that award added according to ''your'' timetable, not anyone elses. It had to be done immediately, so much so, that you went ahead and made the change yourself — and after it was implemented, you then {{Diff|Talk:Nat Gertler|1166953436|1166768424|patted yourself on the back with a "Yay!"}} for your efforts — such was the ''exhilaration'' you felt at being able to calm ever-present suspicions that the article wasn't being updated quickly enough. I'm certain that when you look at your actions surrounding that edit, and the sense of urgency which drove it, you would find absolutely no issues of concern whatsoever. Others might come to a completely opposite conclusion. <span style="font-size:85%;border:3px solid red;border-radius:15px">]</span> 14:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::::::I'm afraid that the bullshit you are spewing about what happened is far from reality. First of all, rather than "would brook no delays", I waited ''more than a month'' for any response to my requested edit.... and then the response was rather nonsensical. Having faced no real objection to the inclusion of the nomination (you voiced none, just to the lack of a link), I did go ahead and add the nomination... but that is not what the "Yay!" you're pretending was in response to actually addressed. After I won the award, I did ], and after that (although not using my wording), which the Yay was in response to. | |||
:::::::Both this talk page and the article itself have History tabs which you could have consulted before staging your unfounded attack. They would have given you the exact same information I have given you above, and would've spared you posting your embarrassing post. | |||
:::::::(There was no "timetable" in place after your inappropriate denial of the addition of the nomination, as you had marked the request as "answered" so that no appropriate editor would come by to see the request. You didn't happen back by the page until weeks later, interestingly .) | |||
:::::::If you wish to take me to ], go ahead. There's the link for you. -- ] (]) 16:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
{{reflist-talk}} | |||
== Updating for the Eisner Award win == | |||
If anyone reading this has a photo, please write something here. A headshot would add to this article. In addition, if an image or drawing would like to be donated to Wikimedia, about a comic strip character or seen, that might help this article too.--] (]) 10:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
The awards have been held, and the article should likely be updated to reflect the result. In the ''Awards and nominations'' section, the line | |||
== Advert == | |||
* 2023 Eisner Award nomination: Best Comics-Related Book ''Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects'' by Benjamin L. Clark and Nat Gertler | |||
should have the word nomination deleted. can be used as reference. The closing sentence of the introduction should also be updated -- I recommend "He has been nominated for Eisner Awards in three different categories, winning in 2023 in the category Best Comics-Related Book.", but obviously the phrasing of this is where my lack of neutrality comes into play. -- ] (]) 14:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
:And that matter has now been taken care of! Yay! -- ] (]) 20:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
The article reads like an ] when you include "Los Angeles Times, The Boston Globe, USA Today, etc the Chicago Sun-Times". It should read simply as "His 2010 The Peanuts Collection received positive reviews." (with those references) There is only one mention of Nat Gertler on Gnews and it's with him making a comment on a blog. ] (]) 13:47, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
*I would suggest you read ]. This article is written neutrally in tone and the tag simply does not apply. I've removed it. ] (]) 14:14, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Category suggested == | |||
**I agree with Shawn in Montreal. If an independent reviewer in a newspaper writes a glowing review, then it is fine for us to say so. When neutral, nonbiased and respected sources such as the Los Angeles Times, Boston Globe, and Chicago Sun-Times say they like a book, then it is fine for us to include that information.--] (]) 14:34, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
*If you click the "Archives" link on Gnews, you will find dozens of other references to "Nat Gertler". Without going to the Archives, Gnews only gives you the past few weeks. --] (]) 14:55, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
* makes it abundantly clear that what we have here is more a question of tit-for-tat ] than any genuine attempt to address real issues. ] (]) 14:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
Can some editor review whether this article belongs in ] and, if so, add it. (There is no subcategory for the specific award which I won. although it could be added.) -- ] (]) 18:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC) | |||
**I'm not suggesting that there are no improvements to be made: in fact, I've stated on the Liber article that your citations needed tag should be ''retained'', as you well know. But the comment in the link above cannot be taken seriously. And of course none of this helps your Hay article one bit. ] (]) 15:57, 18 August 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Erroneous Big Bang credit == | |||
== Gertner == | |||
I raised this years ago, but it was in the midst of a spate of other requests and got overlooked: the mention of me haivng written for Big Bang issues 7 through 8 should just be 8. As , what was attributed by that site to me in issue 7 was just an ad for issue 8. -- ] (]) 16:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC) | |||
Oh, and as long as I'm suggesting corrections: in the infobox, "nomination" would properly be plural; I received a second one in 2006, as you can see --] (]) 15:35, 18 August 2012 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:05, 16 November 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nat Gertler article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 years |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Misplaced Pages contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Conflict of Interest edit requests
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Three requested edits:
- In opening sentence, including four on Charles Schulz's Peanuts. --four should be changed to six. :
- Since the last updating of that sentence, two additional books have been published, Be My Charlie Brown and Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects:
- References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button): Be More Charlie Brown catalog listing,article on Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects
- Last sentence of intro, Gertler made a guest appearance on the comic review show Atop The Fourth Wall as himself. should be deleted due to its trivial nature. (If you want a Misplaced Pages reason to delete it, it's an unsourced statement in a BLP. It's true, mind you, but unsourced, and not a lead-worthy item. I've made appearances on/in many things.)
- At bottom of Selected works: Books section, add: Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects (written with Benjamin L. Clark and The Charles M Schulz Museum), Weldon Owen, 2022 (ISBN 9781681888606)
Nat Gertler (talk) 01:09, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
References
- Taylor, Dan (November 2, 2022). "New 'Peanuts' archival book released by Schulz Museum". Press Democrat.
New photo available
I have made a more recent photo available for use.
I leave it up to others whether this should be included. --Nat Gertler (talk) 19:09, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
Updating for new Eisner Award nomination
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
- In the intro, update He has been nominated for two Eisner Awards. to three Eisner Awards.
- At the end of the "Awards and nominations" list, add 2023 Eisner Award nomination: Best Comics-Related Book Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects by Benjamin L. Clark and Nat Gertler
Thanks! -- Nat Gertler (talk) 17:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC) Nat Gertler (talk) 17:57, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
References
- "Eisner Awards Current Info". comic-con.org. May 17, 2023.
Reply 28-JUN-2023
- The specifically nominated Eisner Award's Wikilink has not been included with the request. Please provide the Wikilink to the award's Misplaced Pages page.
Spintendo 01:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Spintendo: I am missing how that is at all needed to implement the change. That specific category does not yet have a Misplaced Pages page. I cannot make said page because of an obvious WP:COI. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 05:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- Never mind. Given that this edit has been requested on the Talk page for over a month with no objection to its content (and only a nonsensical one to its formatting), that it includes a sourced correction, and that it contains nothing out of nature with the article as it existed, I have gone ahead and made the edit, despite my WP:COI (Even if we are to accept the concept that it should include a wikilink to a non-existent page,. requested edits should not be rejected simply for not being perfect; they should only be rejected for not being improvements, much as with any other edit.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 06:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- And just to make sure I'm meeting every requirement where I can: My conflict of interest with regard to this article is that I am its subject. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply, I don't get pings when I use my cell phone. With regards to your question, by their very nature, awards can be subjective, in that they represent a very specific point of view: that of the individual or organization which determines who wins the award and why. To counter this, a good approach is to limit the listing of awards to only those which are independently notable in Misplaced Pages. What I'm asking for is not due to WP:N (which I need not remind you, is not a content requirement). The request for notability in this case is to ensure WP:NPOV. The adding of several points of view to an article in the form of non-notable awards may skew an article's balance. Thus, this reviewer's own practice is to limit the listing of awards to those which are independently notable in Misplaced Pages. It's all right if you have difficulty understanding this—having a COI is similar to a blind spot, which prevents a person from recognizing interests which may be conflicted. I don't believe that the request that I made of you asking for the award to be notable in Misplaced Pages is anything out of the ordinary. Say 6 months from now, the award gets its own page. No harm done. But for some, that wait may seem like an eternity. Is that FOMO occurring in someone's own article—I doubt it, but it wouldn't be beyond the realm of possibility. I just try to do my best. Regards, Spintendo 06:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- While the specific category does not have a page, the Eisner Awards were already linked on the page, and thus should not have been linked again for overlinking. You could have noticed that fairly easily, as my requested changes specifically included incrementing the number of nominations, indicating that the Eisners were already covered in the article. Or you could have taken less time than it took to respond to enter Eisner Awards into the search box to verify that the Awards do indeed have their own page. (Indeed, my previous Eisner nominations were considered of enough note that they were why this page was not deleted . This is not just a matter of "FOMO", whatever spin you may want to put on it; there was a no-longer accurate number sitting on the page. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 12:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I think your ideas on what could have reasonably been done to expedite the request are a terrific start, and much appreciated. When presented with what seemed to you to be an interminable delay, you could have said to yourself, "You know what? That's fine. It can wait. I feel okay with it not happening now, because I know having distance between me and the article is not the opposite of good. This isn't a rush job, and when it happens, it happens." A very idyllic response which unfortunately did not occur. You would brook no such delays. You wanted that award added according to your timetable, not anyone elses. It had to be done immediately, so much so, that you went ahead and made the change yourself — and after it was implemented, you then patted yourself on the back with a "Yay!" for your efforts — such was the exhilaration you felt at being able to calm ever-present suspicions that the article wasn't being updated quickly enough. I'm certain that when you look at your actions surrounding that edit, and the sense of urgency which drove it, you would find absolutely no issues of concern whatsoever. Others might come to a completely opposite conclusion. Spintendo 14:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid that the bullshit you are spewing about what happened is far from reality. First of all, rather than "would brook no delays", I waited more than a month for any response to my requested edit.... and then the response was rather nonsensical. Having faced no real objection to the inclusion of the nomination (you voiced none, just to the lack of a link), I did go ahead and add the nomination... but that is not what the "Yay!" you're pretending was in response to actually addressed. After I won the award, I did add a request for such an edit here on the Talk page, and after that someone who is not me added that information to the article (although not using my wording), which the Yay was in response to.
- Both this talk page and the article itself have History tabs which you could have consulted before staging your unfounded attack. They would have given you the exact same information I have given you above, and would've spared you posting your embarrassing post.
- (There was no "timetable" in place after your inappropriate denial of the addition of the nomination, as you had marked the request as "answered" so that no appropriate editor would come by to see the request. You didn't happen back by the page until weeks later, interestingly quite shortly after I corrected your policy claims elsewhere.)
- If you wish to take me to WP:COIN, go ahead. There's the link for you. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I think your ideas on what could have reasonably been done to expedite the request are a terrific start, and much appreciated. When presented with what seemed to you to be an interminable delay, you could have said to yourself, "You know what? That's fine. It can wait. I feel okay with it not happening now, because I know having distance between me and the article is not the opposite of good. This isn't a rush job, and when it happens, it happens." A very idyllic response which unfortunately did not occur. You would brook no such delays. You wanted that award added according to your timetable, not anyone elses. It had to be done immediately, so much so, that you went ahead and made the change yourself — and after it was implemented, you then patted yourself on the back with a "Yay!" for your efforts — such was the exhilaration you felt at being able to calm ever-present suspicions that the article wasn't being updated quickly enough. I'm certain that when you look at your actions surrounding that edit, and the sense of urgency which drove it, you would find absolutely no issues of concern whatsoever. Others might come to a completely opposite conclusion. Spintendo 14:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- While the specific category does not have a page, the Eisner Awards were already linked on the page, and thus should not have been linked again for overlinking. You could have noticed that fairly easily, as my requested changes specifically included incrementing the number of nominations, indicating that the Eisners were already covered in the article. Or you could have taken less time than it took to respond to enter Eisner Awards into the search box to verify that the Awards do indeed have their own page. (Indeed, my previous Eisner nominations were considered of enough note that they were why this page was not deleted . This is not just a matter of "FOMO", whatever spin you may want to put on it; there was a no-longer accurate number sitting on the page. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 12:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply, I don't get pings when I use my cell phone. With regards to your question, by their very nature, awards can be subjective, in that they represent a very specific point of view: that of the individual or organization which determines who wins the award and why. To counter this, a good approach is to limit the listing of awards to only those which are independently notable in Misplaced Pages. What I'm asking for is not due to WP:N (which I need not remind you, is not a content requirement). The request for notability in this case is to ensure WP:NPOV. The adding of several points of view to an article in the form of non-notable awards may skew an article's balance. Thus, this reviewer's own practice is to limit the listing of awards to those which are independently notable in Misplaced Pages. It's all right if you have difficulty understanding this—having a COI is similar to a blind spot, which prevents a person from recognizing interests which may be conflicted. I don't believe that the request that I made of you asking for the award to be notable in Misplaced Pages is anything out of the ordinary. Say 6 months from now, the award gets its own page. No harm done. But for some, that wait may seem like an eternity. Is that FOMO occurring in someone's own article—I doubt it, but it wouldn't be beyond the realm of possibility. I just try to do my best. Regards, Spintendo 06:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- And just to make sure I'm meeting every requirement where I can: My conflict of interest with regard to this article is that I am its subject. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 15:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- Never mind. Given that this edit has been requested on the Talk page for over a month with no objection to its content (and only a nonsensical one to its formatting), that it includes a sourced correction, and that it contains nothing out of nature with the article as it existed, I have gone ahead and made the edit, despite my WP:COI (Even if we are to accept the concept that it should include a wikilink to a non-existent page,. requested edits should not be rejected simply for not being perfect; they should only be rejected for not being improvements, much as with any other edit.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 06:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
References
- "WP:BALANCE". Misplaced Pages. 20 July 2019.
...articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects.
Updating for the Eisner Award win
The awards have been held, and the article should likely be updated to reflect the result. In the Awards and nominations section, the line
- 2023 Eisner Award nomination: Best Comics-Related Book Charles M. Schulz: The Art and Life of the Peanuts Creator in 100 Objects by Benjamin L. Clark and Nat Gertler
should have the word nomination deleted. this page can be used as reference. The closing sentence of the introduction should also be updated -- I recommend "He has been nominated for Eisner Awards in three different categories, winning in 2023 in the category Best Comics-Related Book.", but obviously the phrasing of this is where my lack of neutrality comes into play. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- And that matter has now been taken care of! Yay! -- Nat Gertler (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Category suggested
Can some editor review whether this article belongs in Category:Eisner Award winners and, if so, add it. (There is no subcategory for the specific award which I won. although it could be added.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Erroneous Big Bang credit
I raised this years ago, but it was in the midst of a spate of other requests and got overlooked: the mention of me haivng written for Big Bang issues 7 through 8 should just be 8. As this comics.org listing shows, what was attributed by that site to me in issue 7 was just an ad for issue 8. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 16:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages articles that use American English
- Biography articles of living people
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Low-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class Comics articles
- Low-importance Comics articles
- Start-Class Comics articles of Low-importance
- Start-Class Comics creators articles
- Comics creators work group articles
- Start-Class United States comics articles
- United States comics work group articles
- Start-Class DC Comics articles
- DC Comics work group articles
- WikiProject Comics articles
- Articles edited by connected contributors
- Implemented requested edits