Jump to content

Talk:How the García Girls Lost Their Accents

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleHow the García Girls Lost Their Accents has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 12, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
November 14, 2008Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article

Evaluation

[edit]

I was trying to formulate a civil way to show concern about this entry, but I'm just going to be blunt...it's very, very bad. I'd save it from the gutter myself, but I've never read the book. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 06:59, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to improve it. <KF> 22:02, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Our Plan

[edit]

Hola clase, the following is our tentative plan for the gradual improvement of the Wikipedia article on How the García Girls Lost Their Accents by Julia Alvarez. It’s quite possible that over the course of them term our plan, like our article, will evolve, but for now this is what we’ve decided:


As a group, our goals are:

  • To achieve “Good” or hopefully “Featured Article” Status on Wikipedia
  • To produce a concise, informative and reliable page that will do justice to the efforts of Julia Alvarez’s production of How the García Girls Lost Their Accents


In order to accomplish these goals we will:

  • Flesh out the intro, pare down the plot outline and add several informative sub-categories to tell about various topics of interest with regards to the novel  Done
  • Either discard or add substance to the “Survey of Chapters” section
 Done. I discarded it. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:58, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Either organize into subcategories or discard the collection of random information currently lumped together under “Outline of the Plot”  Done
  • Edit out all the extraneous and opinionated information that currently comprises the better part of the article  Done
  • Put together a solid list of well-researched, properly referenced, reliable sources from a variety of scholarly articles, from which we will compile our information… (so that the content of the article can achieve a higher level of credibility than it currently possesses, with sparknotes as it’s only source/link)
This is mostly done, though see my comments below. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Continually and incrementally make edits to our article, both great and small, throughout the course of the term


We have divided the group responsibilities into sections as follows:

  • Beth – Article Intro (Lead Section) Done, Analysis of Major Themes Done, Authorial Style Done, (possibly a symbols or genre section)
  • Kaan – Background/ Historical Context, List of Other works by Julia Alvarez Summarization of Main Characters --Kyalkin (talk) 01:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)kyalkin[reply]
  • Leanna – Plot Summary/ Outline, Reception by the Public (Criticisms/ Praise), Key Notes on the Author

This our plan. We’ll see how it goes!

Cheers, Beth --Bdaoust (talk) 06:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a good plan. You can of course add to it over time. And cross things off when you've done them, including adding a big green checkmark {{done}}  Done. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:20, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C'mon guys, at present this is still just one long unreferenced plot outline... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

[edit]

The following is a compilation of relevant works we plan to refer to as we gradually flesh out our article on How the García Girls Lost Their Accents. --Bdaoust (talk) 00:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Alvarez, Julia (1991), How the García Girls Lost Their Accents, New York: Plume, ISBN 0452287073.
  • Christian, Karen (1997), Show and Tell: Identity as Performance in U.S. Latina/o Fiction, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, ISBN 0826317960. Koerner Library Stacks PS153.H56 C47 1997.
Again, an annotation would be helpful. Is there a chapter on Alvarez's book? How can this source help the article? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Johnson, Kelli Lyon (2005), Julia Alvarez: Writing a New Place on the Map, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, ISBN 978-0826336514. In Koerner's at PS3551.L845 Z74 2005.
  • ??, ?? (1994), "Julia Alvarez: Dominican-American Novelist and Poet", in ??, ?? (ed.), Latina Biographies, Paramus: Globe Fearon, pp. ??-??, ISBN ?? {{citation}}: |last= has numeric name (help); Check |isbn= value: invalid character (help).
This information is incomplete: we need the author of the piece, the page numbers, the book editor, and the ISBN. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kafka, Philippa (2000), "Saddling la Gringa": Gatekeeping in Literature by Contemporary Latina Writers, Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, ISBN 0313311226. Koerner Library Stacks PS153.H56 K34 2000.
    Again, an annotation would be helpful. Is there a chapter on Alvarez's book? How can this source help the article? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rifkind, D. (October 6, 1991), "Speaking American", New York Times Book Review, ?? (??): 14{{citation}}: CS1 maint: date and year (link). In IK Barber at AP2.N66.
  • Rosario-Sievert, Heather (1997), "Conversation with Julia Alvarez", Review: Latin American Literature and Arts, 54: 31–37.
  • Sirias, Silvio (2001), Julia Alvarez: A Critical Companion, Westport, CT: Greenwood, ISBN 978-0313309939. In Koerner's at PS3551.L845 Z87 2001.
  • Smorkaloff, P. M. 1999, Cuban Writers On and Off the Island, New York: Twayne Publishers, ISBN: 0805716173. Koerner Library Stacks PQ7382 .S66 1999.
How much is this about Alvarez's book? After all, Alvarez is not Cuban. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:28, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on bibliography This is an OK start, but it could be more comprehensive and not all the sources found seem to relate very directly to the article. You'll also be wanting to annotate these references as you get hold of them and start working with them to improve the article. And I had to supply some missing information for some of these references. Good luck! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 16:23, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of other works:

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I've already posted this on the main page...not sure if they're going to delete it. Anyway, I plan to add a brief description of each novel at some point. Jon: I pulled this list from www.juliaalvarez.com. I remember you saying this might not be the best source. Is it okay if I cite it in the bibliography as a source for the list and description of the novels? --Kyalkin (talk) 18:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the bibliography just above? That has the sources that you should be using for this article. Also note that this is an article about How the García Girls Lost Their Accents, not about these other books. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:07, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some further reading: Popular novels by Julia Alvarez.

1) Once Upon A Quinceañera: Coming of Age in the USA (Viking: August 2007)

2) Saving the World (Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, April 2006)

3) Gift of Gracias The Legend of Altagracia (New York: Knopf Book for Young Readers, October 2005)

4) Finding Miracles (New York: Knopf Book for Young Readers, 2004)

5) The Woman I Kept To Myself (Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, 2004)

6) Before We Were Free (New York: Knopf Book for Young Readers, 2002)

7) A Cafecito Story (White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishers, 2001) Woodcuts by Belkis Ramirez

8) How Tía Lola Came to Stay (New York: Knopf Book for Young Readers, 2001)

9) The Secret Footprints (New York: Knopf Book for Young Readers, 2000)

10)In the Name of Salomé (Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, 2000)

11) Seven Trees (North Andover: Kat Ran Press, 1998)

12) Something to Declare (Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, 1998)

13) ¡YO! (Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books: 1997)

14) Homecoming: New and Collected Poems (New York: Plume, 1996)

15) The Other Side/El Otro Lado (New York: Dutton, 1995)

16) In The Time of the Butterflies (Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books, 1994)

The problem is that this is not really appropriate for this article, which is on the novel. Look at the models that I've suggested to you: El Señor Presidente and The General in His Labyrinth. They don't have such a section. You should really follow your plan and work with the bibliography of reliable (non-web) sources that you've put together. This list is of course important for the Julia Alvarez article... but you'll see that that already has a list of works. As such, I'm sorry but I'm going to delete this section. If there's anything that can be added to the Julia Alvarez article, I'll add it there. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And as a follow up... in fact, I checked and the list of works at the Julia Alvarez article has exactly the same books. (They probably got the list from the same place.) So there's nothing to add. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:09, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Signing

[edit]

NB you sign posts on talk pages by using two dashes and four tildes: --~~~~. You'll also see a button above the edit window that you can use, by clicking on it as I showed you in class. See also WP:SIGN. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background & Historical Context

[edit]

Here we will feature information about the context of the novel and how it relates, if at all, to the life of Julia Alvarez. Please note that this article is not complete. --Kyalkin (talk) 18:53, 10 October 2008 (UTC)Kyalkin[reply]

In an article written by professor William Luis he begins to describe the situation of immigrants from the Dominican Republic to the United States during the 1960’s revolution:

“The displacement of the Caribbean people’s from their Island to the United States, for political or economical reasons, has produced a tension between the culture of the country of origin and that of the adopted homeland, one representing the past, and the other future of the immigrant”[2]

The Garcia family is an example of this phenomenon. In How the Garcia Girls lost their Accents, Alvarez succeeds in altering the events of her own life to create fiction [3]. The family is displaced to the United States after living an established, upper-class life in the Dominican Republic, and is forced to face the challenges which come along with being an immigrant family in a foreign land. Julia Alvarez herself was not actually born in the Dominican Republic, but actually in the United States. After her parents failed attempt at a life in America, she returned to the Dominican Republic at the age of three months as her parents preferred the dictatorship of Trujillo to the USA. [1] How the Garcia Girls Lost their Accents is the first novel written by Julia Alvarez, after twenty-one years of life in the United States. Kyalkin (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)kyalkin[reply]

OK, I've moved this over to the article. Keep at it! NB we need full citations for the references you're citing. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Summarization of Main Characters

[edit]

Here we will describe the main and important characters in the novel. --Kyalkin (talk) 01:28, 20 October 2008 (UTC)kyalkin[reply]

good job with the plot summary

[edit]

Leanna1 has done a good job with the plot summary, cutting it down and making it more manageable. Well done! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 06:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General comments from Awadewit

[edit]

This is a good start! Here are some suggestions to help you refine what you have drafted here:

  • Right now the "Background and historical context" section is too detailed. The reader who doesn't already know about these historical events will be confused. For example, you will need to briefly explain and describe the 1960s revolution in the Dominican Republic and the dictatorship of Trujillo. See, for example, A Vindication of the Rights of Men and Le Père Goriot. These articles also discuss the historical and literary context in one section - an idea you might consider.
  • The "Literary context" section should be expanded to include information on what kinds of writing influenced Alvarez (I assume this is where you are going).
  • Be sure that the plot summary remains focused on the plot. At times, elements of thematic analysis creep in, for example, Class becomes a more apparent theme with the story of the Haitian family maid elucidated, which is an indirect commentary Trujillo's massacre of Haitians and congruent with the political theme. The themes should be discussed in the "Themes" section. Bdaoust (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure what the reference to the California Law Review really demonstrates to the reader in the "Reception" section. It seems like a random fact.
  • Why are Luis's and Hoffman's articles singled out for attention in the "Reception" section? We should only single out the most important responses to the book - try to identify the most important scholarly responses and identify them for the reader in the text as such.
  • It seems like you need to do a lot more research to flesh out the "Themes" and "Style" sections in particular. These sections are the "meat" of the article, as they explain the meaning of the book and how it is written.

Please let me know if you have any questions. Awadewit (talk) 16:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, thanks! We will make the necessary changes and edits to make this a great article! I will change the "Background Section" and will discuss with Leanna about combining her "Literary context" section with mine. Kyalkin (talk) 01:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)kyalkin[reply]


  • Thanks Awadewit! That's very helpful feedback! The Themes and Authorial Style sections are currently under construction and I should have them up in the next day or two. I've also considered adding a section on major symbols in Garcia Girls. What are your thoughts on that guys?--Bdaoust (talk) 04:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Beth! Glad to hear things are going well for you, I'm excited to see what you post for your sections! I think a major symbols section would be a great idea. We can talk about it in class on Wednesday perhaps. I think for our GA nomination we should try and get everything that's on our plan up, and we can always add that section next week. At the same time, if we can get it up before hand that would be great. Hope you're doing well! Kyalkin (talk) 17:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)kyalkib[reply]

Update, Nov. 6

[edit]

Alright you guys, I'm starting to post my sections as I complete them (I'm sure I'll still be making some edits to them). I'm not sure how to cite the sources properly on wikipedia so I'm just going to put them up for now and hopefully either someone will help us with that or once I figure it out I'll go back and make the necessary changes. I'll keep posting each theme/symbol/etc as I finish it, so that we can have as much time for feedback from the helpful wikipedians as possible. Happy wiki-ing!:)--Bdaoust (talk) 01:07, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the formatting. But do make sure: 1) that your citations have the author, the year, and the correct page number(s); and 2) that there is also a full record of the reference used in the "References" section. With that information, I can ensure that the formatting is AOK. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome job Beth! Your sections look fantastic, I just read through them. Although I still think we have a bit of work to do, the article is really starting to come along! Kyalkin (talk) 06:04, 9 November 2008 (UTC)kyalkin[reply]

Looks good guys! Nice elucidations--Sauceyboy (talk) 21:50, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last stages

[edit]

What's up? Der Kommissar has asked me to mentor the article through its last stages, and I'll do my damnedest as long as you remember that my advice and experience is limited to my own perspective. The more people's opinions you seek—though a bit mind-boggling to meet all the requests—will allow you to be better prepared when you go through the GA nomination or FAC.

I'll give it as thorough a review as I can—from someone who has not read the novel. You can simultaneously request a Peer review, which may attract editors with interest in literature, or just general comments. Or you can wait - that's up to you. Just a word on time: peer reviews stay open for a month or so (you can close them early if you wish). Your GA review may take that long as well. FACs may take up to a week (rare) to a month (normal) or more. Remind me of your time frame, again please? --Moni3 (talk) 03:48, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. Good to see you around here, old chap! Very sporting of you to take up the challenge. These guys want to get home some time for Christmas! Ideally, we hope to have done with GA within ten days to a fortnight. Then see where we are from there...
Oh, and a word to the students here... moni3 is an artist of the edit summary; take note... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I see. Well, then. Let's do this: tomorrow I'll give it a thorough review. Once you folk have a handle on those suggestions, to maximize your time, request a peer review and nominate it for Good Article at the same time. The GA review could be done in days or weeks. You might ask humbly for expediency. I'll advise you on that. Let's say by Dec. 1 if no GA review yet, it will be time to panic on a most alarming level. --Moni3 (talk) 04:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ve haf ways of makin them review!  ;) But that sounds magnificent! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 04:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

overlinking

[edit]

Guys, have a look here. Beware of overlinking! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moni3 Review and Prep for GA

[edit]

Hey there. Ok, let's take a peek at the article. Pardon me for appearing to be blunt. But it's better as a list of things to fix to be straightforward. Don't take this as criticism of the article as a whole. It's clear you have put a lot of time and effort into it.

Lead

  • Your first sentence should be so plain it's blinding. Try How the García Girls Lost Their Accents is a 1991 novel by Dominican-American poet and novelist Julia Alvarez. Its major themes include acculturation and coming of age.
  • Do you think you could call it a Bildungsroman? Do sources call it that?
    • Good question. The students are more au fait with the sources than I am at this stage; but I'm not entirely sure that a novel focussing in this way on four characters (and written in reverse chronological order) is really a Bildungsroman, though it shares much with that genre. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:11, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link the first instance of a term: Dominican Republic.
  • Spell out Trujillo's full name in the lead, and include a partial phrase here that prepares the reader for why this family should be fleeing the Dominican Republic. Corrupt dictator? Cruel tyrant?
  • This sentence: The text consists of fifteen interconnected short stories, each of which focuses on one of the four daughters, and in a few instances, the García family as a whole. seems overly difficult.
  • This phrase: who is said to be is tricky. I suggest rewording it to something like who is considered by reviewers/scholars to be
  • The lead, for GA, is perfection. For FA, as a kick, I would suggest adding a quote from one of your scholars that sums up the impact of the novel, hopefully using some kind of superlative. That's my preference. I like to draw readers in with the lead. --Moni3 (talk) 15:54, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background and historical context

The first sentence of this section should tell the reader immediately what the background history is. A quote from a scholar is useful in shoring up a point, but you want a topic sentence for this section and an immediate time frame and context for the reader: The years of xxxx to xxxx were adjective in the Dominican Republic as this historical event was taking place... You're giving an introduction to the conflict for the readers. Now everything after Mr. Victor, of the U.S. Embassy is something I don't understand.

  • Stay away from "we see" as it assumes all readers have the same perspective as you do.
  • Only because I have been a wounded soldier at the merciless hands of Tony1's grammar school of hard knocks do I advise you to watch the repetition and unnecessary words (e.x.: an immigrant family in a foreign land, but actually, more and more). I copy edited some of this section. I suggest you go through the rest of the article.
  • Watch the overlinking of common terms: political, displacement, foreign - any word that is directly related to understanding the text should be linked. If it's relatively common, err right now on not linking it.
  • Alvarez wrote an essay entitled “An American Childhood in the Dominican Republic”, here she reveals some information about her own life, which leads us to believe that it may have served as the basis for the novel. First, this is a run-on sentence. Second, it's not clear when this essay was written or how it connects to the novel. Again, watch your wording with "leads us to believe". "We" don't believe anything. You are but the channel through which the points of reviewers, scholars, and Alvarez herself will get to Wikipedia readers.
  • Watch the consistency of United States, U.S., US, USA, etc. It's fine to use United States at its first appearance, then abbreviate it to U.S. in every mention thereafter.
  • I suggest restructuring this section to reflect:
    • 1st paragraph about the political climate of the Dominican Republic that influences the author's and her characters' perspectives. Assume, please, your readers know nothing about what is culturally important in this part of the Caribbean, or what is politically good or bad. I did not understand the context of Chapitas in the Plot summary.
    • 2nd paragraph about Alvarez's own experience moving between countries.
    • 3rd paragraph about a broader statement of the immigrant experience, and particularly specific to this novel

Plot Summary

  • Citations in plot summaries aren't generally necessary.
  • I'm a fan of the skeletal plot summary. But here we get into a more individual interpretation of what's best for this article depending on the book. Generally, however, the plot summary should summarize the action of the story without too much detail. Just enough to give the reader an idea of what the conflicts and themes of the story are. I would seriously consider cutting much of the material here to move it to different sections about interpretation of the novel, or removing it completely. But understand that I have not read the novel. This is something you should discuss with each other.
  • It's however worth it to say that you are doing some interpretation of the material for your readers in this section. Instead, this section should be about basics: what happens in the story?

Characters

  • could be named? This sounds like original research (OR). Remember, you can't interpret any part of this novel for your audience. You can only reflect what others have written or said about it. I would suggest that you insert more instances of Scholar Big Name writes of this character, "Important stuff".
  • After her marriage to him, her relationship with her father deteriorates significantly until her son is born. Why?
  • I'm not sure about this section. At this time, I don't see what it leads the reader to understand. I'm going to reserve comment on how to change it other than giving it a thorough copy edit for the aforementioned overlinking, grammar, and OR issues. I'd like to read the section again after the Plot summary and Background sections have been altered.

Style and Structure

  • This citation format in this section is inconsistent with the rest of the article.
  • I'm just going to reiterate WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. If you plan to take this to FAC, dude they are hard core. Nothing can be in the article to suggest the writers have interpreted any part of this work.
  • Here you have started to use scholars who write about Alvarez' work - good. Introduce them as authors, scholars, etc., so it gives readers an idea of who is commenting.
  • The punctuation and grammar here need a cleanup. Titles in italics. Simple stuff.
  • What is this? overtly North American qualities Do I have an overtly North American quality? I want to know.
  • I suggest a bit of restructuring here as well. Nothing drastic, but you're writing this for basically anyone.
    • 1st pararaph: The most significant literary element that scholars comment on in Alvarez' novel is the use of reverse chronological order in the plot... How does this add to the story? The things scholars have said about how it lends the reader to make perceptions about the immigrant experience.
    • 3rd paragraph: Another element unique to How the García Girls Lost Their Accents is the switching of narrator perspectives between third and first person. This switching is important because these smart people have said so...
    • Gracious sakes alive, help me with this: the amnesia produced by the diasporic cultures of Latinas gets negotiated within the text through polyphony” Actually, I have difficulty understanding this paragraph and what it's trying to say.

Major Themes

  • Just FYI - the section of Fragmentation of self is quite well-written - a marked change from the previous section. Nice job. I would go through this just to tighten some of the points you want to make. There is a small bit of room for making things a little clearer. Don't you like how vague some stuff gets as the quality of writing gets better? Please go through and copy edit for grammar and punctuation.
  • Here's a Wiki picky: subheadings are capitalized at the beginning, unless it's a title.
  • thus warrants its discussion as a separate category Might be better to state it warrants separate categorization. The discussion is what you're doing...and kind of self-evident.
  • You, ah, used this quote twice: “whose artistic predilections were crushed as a child, Yolanda faces and works through her identity problems in her writing.
  • I stopped at Assimilation and that is where I will start again tomorrow. --Moni3 (talk) 02:49, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Guys, how many of the above notes from Moni3 have you managed to deal with? I don't see much interaction here, either with Moni3 or with Taxman's review (below). The article's really quite close to GA now, I think. Please deal with the outstanding issues, and then you can move on! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 04:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kaan and I have been discussing and editing the article as per Moni3's recommendations. I've decided to leave the plot summary fleshed out, but have transferred the thematic comments to other sections. We've really appreciated the advice, and our article is better for your input! -- Leanna 142.103.92.1 (talk) 14:20, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we have all been working very hard to adjust the article with regards to Moni3's reccommendations and significant edits are to follow today and tomorrow, after which I believe they should be, on the whole, sufficiently addressed. Bdaoust (talk) 23:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have gone through the suggested edits and ensured that they were caried out in the Style and Themes sections. I've crossed out the completed suggestions above as well. Thanks again Moni3 for your thorough review! It was very helpful.Bdaoust (talk) 11:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further tips

[edit]

Go ahead and place the article at Peer Review as soon as possible. Once you have a handle on the above changes and you have read the criteria for Good Articles, start the nomination process. You'll get a single reviewer who could be hard but thorough, easy but leaves you wondering if they even read it, or something in between; and they'll review it when they get to it, which means whenever. It's a good idea to read other works of literature or other articles on the GA nomination list. Look for articles that are on hold and read the things other reviewers are asking nominators to do. You can tinker with the article at any time if you anticipate something in here could be improved.

GAN

[edit]

Guys, I'm adding this article to the GAN queue. Per Moni3's very helpful suggestions, you've got some work to do... But you can do it! You have a roadmap towards GA... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:How the García Girls Lost Their Accents/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
  • It's quite a nice article. This is far from my usual topic areas so I can't comment too much on content specifics. The structure does look well laid out and balanced at least and I can't think of much a novel article should have that this doesn't. The one thing I can think of is that there is no information on sales numbers, distribution, etc. In other words everything on the business side of the novel. How long did it take to get picked up for publishing how many printings has it had, etc. If you check good film articles they all cover this type of thing well. Perhaps also check the best other articles on novels in Wikipedia and see if you can find anything else they cover that you should. 2) The lead section is a little too short and doesn't properly summarize the whole article. For an article this size a lead section should be about 3 cohesive paragraphs. Luckily this will be fairly easy in this case since you just need to summarize the significance and reception including the business aspects and then maybe add a bit more to the rest and you should have a proper lead section. My thoughts are that with the suggestions outlined by Moni3 and those above implemented this will be a GA. - Taxman Talk 15:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Taxman, please mark that this article is "on hold" at the GAN page. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 18:31, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. I'm not used to all the GA paperwork. FAC is a little easier in that respect. - Taxman Talk 15:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for closure

[edit]

Due to the backlog at GAN, I am recommending this article be failed. There are still WP:OR issues that need to be addressed. Generally, articles are put on hold for seven days, and even though there is always some leeway, considering the backlog - it would be better to renominate this article once the issues brought up in this review and on the talk page are addressed. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 20:19, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is up to the reviewer to decide when to close the review. The backlog has nothing to do with it. GAN reviewers, like all editors, are volunteers, and work on what interests them. Geometry guy 20:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
i wasn't exactly saying fail the article because of the backlog, i was saying that i felt the article should fail becuase it still has OR issues. People who sign up to review articles at GAN do not suddenly WP:OWN them, and the default message is that other comments from editors are encouraged. While there's always leeway, it is recommended to give editors about a week to address issues. I am not trying force any issue, just give my own opinion. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 01:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't fail it yet! We are students in our final exam period. As I just finished my last exam this afternoon, I plan to address all the OR issues tomorrow and the next day. Give us a day or two! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.40.134 (talk) 09:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sorry for the hold up. There wasn't much action, then all of a sudden there was when I didn't see it. I'd still like to see information on the business side of the novel, but that can be added when someone brings this to featured article level. At this point it is very well done and well referenced. I feel it meets the good article criteria. Sorry if this was a bit late for grading, but your professor also knows good articles when he sees them. - Taxman Talk 15:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on How the García Girls Lost Their Accents. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:How_the_García_Girls_Lost_Their_Accents&oldid=1207652334"