Talk:Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow

message: :Actually, the nomination for the 1st AfD was withdrawn by the nominator. At the time, no consensus had been reached. The article has been nominated/relisted for a second AfD.  Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  03:12, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't seem like a controversial change. I'd be for it. --Oakshade 02:12, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Moooooove it. -- Rob C (Alarob) 02:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I don't know how I ran across this article, but I have taken an interest in it. I see that the community consensus was to keep it, so I won't comment on that, but there is waaaaaaaay to much detail in this for an encyclopedia article. I don't think we need to know all the brand names of the equipment and paint used. But I did run a spellcheck on all of it. Good luck! Katr67 18:28, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. This doesn't fit the definition of performance art. Katr67 18:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Level of detail

message: If this survives Afd (again), it needs some serious copyediting (I ran a few spellchecks but it still needs work on grammar, syntax, typos, etc.), some wikification, changing of the term "performance art" to "public art" throughout, and as I stated above--the listings of materials and methods need to tightened up considerably. Wikipedia is not a how-to guide, and this is what it reads like. I'd like to see another article about an artwork (and as charming as Gladys is, I'm afraid she is not fine art, but folk art) that lists materials and methods in such detail. That's not a rhetorical question, I really would like  to see if there is an example. Also, I have noticed a trend on Wikipedia wherein those who vote to keep articles don't stick around to help bring them up to standard, so I hope that's not the case here. </soapbox> Katr67 08:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Took a shot at the recommneded cleanup - detail out public art in. Comments 12.111.52.254 (talk) 17:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, this looks a lot better. Just so you know, I voted delete in the AfD but it's nothing personal, I just had some concerns, as you have read over there. I'll continue to address those concerns on the AfD page. If nothing else, Gladys has made for some interesting Wiki-debate. As far as cleanup goes, this is coming along nicely, but I think I'll refrain from doing more work on it until we see how the AfD comes out. Besides, I'm hoping other editors will help with the cleanup too (hint hint). Katr67 18:01, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Re the cleanup - Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow#History is a bit long isn't it? Have a look over at WP:MOS. If the history section is that long it must have some sensible points where it could be broken up if you want to stay chronological, or you could re-write the history section covering topics that have been addressed - racial tension, public services, I haven't actually read the article but it seems to have a bit of need for a copy editor... Garrie 04:35, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: A user posted the tag without making recommendations as to why they believed the content to be an issue. The position of the tag is in the gallery area. 
I think the thing that needs to happen is that a discussion of how to alleviate this concern occurs. So I gues I'll start it: 
Would removing the scanned images of the media coverage address the concern? If so, I would accept that recommendation--Doc Jimmy 187 (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What steps are needed to address the un-encyclopaedic concern tag? 

message: OK, I copyedited this to a faretheewell, except for the references section, which could still use more work. But I'm done--I've got lots of other stuff I need to work on. My editing should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its suitability as a Wikipedia article. Since it has passed AfD twice, however, it might as well not be a mess. Enjoy! Katr67 03:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup finished 

message: The Original Gladys Holiday Greeting
		For your hard work, insighful opinions and overall contribution to Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow, I hereby award you this Thank You, along with my sincere hope that you have a wonderful holiday season.
--Doc Jimmy 187 (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gladys 

message: Even though it "survived" two AfD (will this be the new GNAA?), this article has some major problems as to its suitability here. 
First, its content does not demonstrate its being encyclopedic with an interest beyond (or much beyond) the borders of Connecticut (recall that Wikipedia should have a world view and a worldwide focus - all references came from local sources, nothing national or regional in scope). 
Second, the primary purpose of the article appears to be promotional as the primary author "happens to be" the owner of the subject,--Doc Jimmy 187 (talk) 15:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For the first point, it passes WP:LOCAL as well as WP:NOTE.  Just becuase it's not "well known" outside a local area (please see WP:Fame in X) is not a reason for a tag.  Your second argument is simply not correct.  Multiple non trivial sources demonstrate the notability of this work and as long as the notability is supported by WP:RS, the conflict of interst concern is moot.  For the third argument, almost everything in the article is supported by one of the references provided.  Carpet tagging every little point is a bad faith action.  For the forth point about the pictures, the objections are completely WP:POV and there's nothing wrong with multiple photos of a a subject.  And for the "last thought", I strongly dissagree that it is "rare" for a work to exceed the notability of it's creator.  I'll just use one example... The film Casablanca is one of the most popular films in history, but a vast majority of people are not familiar with the film's writers Julius J. Epstein, Philip G. Epstein and Howard Koch.  One other question; I've never seen an anon uswer with such astute knowledge of WP so I'll just ask straight out, are you a sockpuppet of someone involved in one of the previous delete attemps? --Oakshade 00:59, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagging 

message: NOTE: The user below is responding to a vandalism warning I left on their talk page (I mentioned WP:POINT and WP:DISRUPT), which was cut and pasted here, with my signature and all.  As I didn't post the message here and this is not the correct forum for a message meant for one user, I removed it.  --Oakshade (talk) 16:59, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies for breaching the WPs that you mention. However, the impossible bureacracy that they represent mean that within a few years Wikipedia is going to resemble a low quality blog, not an encyclopedia. You may have noticed that Gladys remains in Wikipedia, despite all the polite attempts to remove it according to the highly inflated body of rules and procedures which have evolved over time. If these depressing processes continue, I hope that someone opens up a more disciplined venture soon, to which we can happily migrate! One in which Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow will not be characterized as "the work of others" (as distinct from the Monroe, Connecticut village website, and with all due respect to The author's major work of art, the type of which can be found in their dozens on the street corners and parks of many major world cities). Monosig (talk) 12:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disruptive move 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gladys the Swiss Dairy Cow. 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/20070930033334/http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17382392&BRD=1348&PAG=461&dept_id=432860&rfi=6 to http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17382392&BRD=1348&PAG=461&dept_id=432860&rfi=6
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:32, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified