Post by Linda on Jul 23, 2022 15:48:52 GMT
Dear forum members,
Lately, because of my Ukraine project, I referred to 2 Wikipedia articles (on covers and on maxicards) for non-collectors to better grasp what I want to accomplish. Many have reported to me that even after reading the articles, they are still confused by specific terminologies in philately. Hence, I plan on clarifying certain things in some of those Wiki articles that are related to the art of stamp collecting.
I would like to invite everyone to examine Wikipedia and discuss here what we think should be put into the articles.
Here are my picks:
--------------------------------
/*----- MAXIMAPHILY -----*/
--------------------------------
(1) Wikipedia article to be edited: Maximaphily
(2) Content to be added / amended:
Do you think it's OK to add a section on non-traditional maximum card? (Conventionalists may be vexed, lol)
------------------------
/*----- COVER -----*/
------------------------
(1) Wikipedia article to be edited: Cover_(philately)
(2) Content to be added / amended:
------------------------
Based on my experience of creating new Wikipedia articles (such as this one for Parent Commission), Wikipedia's team tends to be very strict on requiring a reference reported by a third-party (usually news or interviews). For example, even if you know a public figure personally very well, you still cannot report an edit to this person's Wikipedia article based on your personal knowledge of her. You have to quote what another legitimate source (and this, if I understand properly, does not include the person's personal website/social media account) says about her.
The problem with my suggested edits will be that, given the small population of stamp collectors, there are not many news / interviews / reports written about philately. Hence potentially, my edits may not be accepted if I am unable to quote someone having said something.
Anyways, I think it's worth trying to make the outside world to understand us a bit better. Hence I am launching this initiative here.
Lately, because of my Ukraine project, I referred to 2 Wikipedia articles (on covers and on maxicards) for non-collectors to better grasp what I want to accomplish. Many have reported to me that even after reading the articles, they are still confused by specific terminologies in philately. Hence, I plan on clarifying certain things in some of those Wiki articles that are related to the art of stamp collecting.
I would like to invite everyone to examine Wikipedia and discuss here what we think should be put into the articles.
Here are my picks:
--------------------------------
/*----- MAXIMAPHILY -----*/
--------------------------------
(1) Wikipedia article to be edited: Maximaphily
(2) Content to be added / amended:
- Conventional definition by FIP Commission for Maximaphily
- Emphasis on the visual concordance between elements
Do you think it's OK to add a section on non-traditional maximum card? (Conventionalists may be vexed, lol)
------------------------
/*----- COVER -----*/
------------------------
(2) Content to be added / amended:
- Usual definition of cover being the entire envelope / mailing box
- Linn's all-encompassing definition of cover
- The existence of unaddressed cover
- The possibility to 'postcartrise' a cover, making a postcard a cover
- Examples of hand-painted / hand-coloured covers by Dorothy Knapp
------------------------
Based on my experience of creating new Wikipedia articles (such as this one for Parent Commission), Wikipedia's team tends to be very strict on requiring a reference reported by a third-party (usually news or interviews). For example, even if you know a public figure personally very well, you still cannot report an edit to this person's Wikipedia article based on your personal knowledge of her. You have to quote what another legitimate source (and this, if I understand properly, does not include the person's personal website/social media account) says about her.
The problem with my suggested edits will be that, given the small population of stamp collectors, there are not many news / interviews / reports written about philately. Hence potentially, my edits may not be accepted if I am unable to quote someone having said something.
Anyways, I think it's worth trying to make the outside world to understand us a bit better. Hence I am launching this initiative here.
