Talk:Gabriel García Márquez/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

1 100 Years of Solitude- Spanish Language Bestseller of All Time?
2 Valid Photo
3 That is NOT how you do things
4 Magical realism
5 Memoria de mis putas tristes
6 First major work?
7 barranquilla?
8 SHORT FICTION: What's a myth? ( Devin Moran)
9 ISBN
10 Story of a Shipwrecked Sailor
11 Year of birth
12 Carlos Fuentes: as one of South America's best writers...
13 Fair use rationale for Image:GabrielGarciaMarquez NoOneWritesToTheColonel.jpg
14 fair use images
15 dates
16 My next big project
17 Suggestions for improvement
18 WikiProject Murder Madness and Mayhem and the FA-Team
19 References
20 Further reading
21 Excellent!
22 Next step
23 Moving external links
24 Reference formatting
25 Contadora Group
26 Comments from Awadewit
27 GA Hold
28 Fact tag
29 PLAN FOR GA
30 GA redux
31 Archive and on to FA...
32 Peer review request
33 Next Step
34 Source and further thoughts
35 Peer review
36 Possible FAC nomination
37 Expand sections
38 Another theme / source

100 Years of Solitude- Spanish Language Bestseller of All Time?

The article asserts this is the case, but surely Don Quixote has sold more copies than 36 million? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.207.243 (talk) 01:02, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Valid Photo

Will someone find a photo of this guy on google images or something? Actually, here's the url http://growabrain.typepad.com/growabrain/images/gabriel_garcia_marquez_1.jpg Someone else has to do it please.

That is NOT how you do things

First, OK, I find it rather funny how you call him "this guy", haha... He is, after all, a very prominent writer, and of course, also... he is "this guy". And no, you don't just "find" pictures on "google or something", you actually use pictures you have the copywrite or rather permision to publish, not just the old fashioned (I don't want to say "American" since that would sound anti American) way.

Magical realism

While I have left the original reference to Magic Realism in, however this really is becoming a vexed term in the field of lit.crit.

There are 2 distinct origins for the term, one German post-surrealist, the other widely abused as a large catch-all for South American literature. It is the latter which is in debate here; many people see it as problematic on the grounds that it imposes an unecessary and unworkable categorisation.

In an interesting article at http://www.qub.ac.uk/english/imperial/india/Magic.htm , by David Mullan a neat summation of the problem is set out:

However, Anglo-American critics have given the term the definition most commonly associated with it, i.e. it is a mixture of the quotidian and the fantastic, both in terms of content and technique. Yet this is to impose a certain paradigm on non-Anglo-American literatures (especially the Spanish-American since the term is most closely associated with it). Essentially, to describe a work of fiction as "magic realist" is to impose a system of order in much the same way a colonial power imposes its idea of order on a subjugated social system. The problem here is that anything which seems uncanny or unfamiliar to Western eyes becomes "magic", while to a native of that culture the events or ways of thinking so described are "real". For the Anglo-American critic, the term becomes a tool which does little more than 'other' the culture a text describes. Additionally, the binarism of magic/realism sets magic as the lesser term when applied by a humanist thinker.

We really ought to be trying to avoid these cultural and ethnocentric shorthands in Wikipedia... sjc

I guess that's what I get for leaving the academic world for a couple of years. I had no idea this debate was going on. When I was in school, it was common to refer to Marquez as the founder of Magic Realism, which was not limited to the South American authors (for example Toni Morrison, and Kurt Vonnegut were considered part of the genre). I don't know what happened to turn the term into a culturally charged debate, but it is unfortunate.

Your above paragraph implies that Marquez would have actually thought he was describing "real" events when a corpse's blood flows out of the house, down the stairs, across town and up through the murder's door to his room. This is uncommon behavior for blood, and comes from a literalization of the "trail of blood" metaphor. To pretend that this is not an intentional mixture of the quotidian and the fantastic, and that it is the reader who imposes this "colonial and oppressive" order on the text seem to me absurd.

On the other hand, if the term is actually being understood by a majority of academics (not just American academics either) as a derogatory remark, we should certainly acknowledge that and change the article accordingly. Prejudice and real cultural imperialism are social practices which we need to strongly discourage in the wikipedia and in the world at large. --MRC

Memoria de mis putas tristes

Memoria de mis putas tristes was released last year, some one should update this page to reflect that. I'm not really confident in english to update it myself

First major work?

The article cites Relato de un náufrago as his first major work, but I believe Leaf Storm was published first, and GGM's autobiography depicts it as his first major work in his own eyes. It was also his first published fictional work beyond short stories, and since he's better known as a fiction writer, it might be misleading to use the nonfiction Relato as his "first major work." Can anyone provide a cite for the text in the article? | MrDarcy ¡digame! 17:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

barranquilla?

Hey As far as I know, Garcia Marquez is saluted as a Barranquillero -- he spent much time and wrote several of his works there (I'm not confident enough to list exactly which, but I'm pretty sure Cien Años at least...). Perhaps there should be some mention of this? 140.247.250.253 01:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)eva

SHORT FICTION: What's a myth? ( Devin Moran)

I recently read The Handsomest Drowned Man in the World: A Tale for Children by Marquez, and I must say that I enjoyed it. I think that it was a great way in showing just how real it can be when a myth is started. I actally thought it was rather sad inthe way the myth panned out. One quote I like to phrase is everything is the dark soon comes to the light. and i think it was a sad day when the village people had to find this out in a rather abrupt way...

ISBN

I have added the ISBN number for this article. Kilo-Lima|^(talk) 13:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Story of a Shipwrecked Sailor

Shouldn't that be moved to the non-fiction section?

Year of birth

There is a discussion whether he is born in 1928 og 1927. According to one editor on the Norwegian Wikipedia his biography says 1927, so says the spanish newspaper El Pais. Encyclopædia Britannica says 1928, the same is written on his biography on the Nobel Foundation website [1].

It would be good to have this correct as he is 80 tomorrow, is 1927 is correct. Ulflarsen 10:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I would ask that an admin look into the changing of year of birth. Have checked with EB and New York Times, both state he was born in 1928. I have reverted it once, someone else take over now. Ulflarsen 15:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

He himself says in "Living to Tell the Tale" that he made himself a year younger by switching his birthday from 1927 to 1928 to avoid the Columbian draft. Somehow it stuck and in many places his year of birth is still reported, incorrectly to be March 6, 1928. Happy 80th Gabo!!!

On the Norwegian Wikipedia we have checked with his agent and he reported that he is indeed born in 1927, so that should be correct and it is what we have used for his article in Norwegian. Ulflarsen 20:32, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Carlos Fuentes: as one of South America's best writers...

Carlos Fuentes was born in Panama to Mexican parents, therefore he should not be included among the South American writers (intro). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eltri85 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

Fair use rationale for Image:GabrielGarciaMarquez NoOneWritesToTheColonel.jpg

Image:GabrielGarciaMarquez NoOneWritesToTheColonel.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

fair use images

The use of images not in compliance with our fair-use criteria or our policy on nonfree content is not appropriate, and the images have been removed. Please do not restore them. -M^ask? 02:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

dates

The dates of the short stories in the bibliography seem to be the publication dates of the English-language collections, not of the original stories. I'm pretty sure, for instance, that Eyes of a Blue Dog was written in 1950, not 1978. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimbluedog (talk • contribs) 23:30, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

My next big project

That a writer of such reknown has such a pitiful wiki page is a travesty. I'm going to work on bringing this page up to Good Article status. Please help out by discussing ideas for improvement on this page.Wuapinmon (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

So, I added a few things, tried to organize it better. Please feel free to do whatever with what I've started.Wuapinmon (talk) 00:21, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement

I agree that the article could definitely use improvement everywhere, but especially in the lead. I would suggest that the editors might want to look at Chinua Achebe and Harold Pinter for ideas of what topics should be covered, and how. Although the article should rightly focus on the writer and his life, more discussion of his works and their style seems warranted. Willow (talk) 16:54, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Murder Madness and Mayhem and the FA-Team

To assist WikiProject Murder Madness and Mayhem in its drive to bring this article to Featured status, a number of experienced editors from the FA-Team have volunteered their editing services to the project. To see which editors are watching this article, click here.

You can contact a specific editor directly by leaving a message on their talk page, or more generally by posting a message here. To do this, click the '+' tab at the top of the page and enter a subject title, and your message, in the editing windows that will appear. Don't forget to finish off by typing four tildes (~~~~) to automatically add your signature; you need to be logged in for this to work properly.

We're all really enthusiastic about this project, and looking forward to working with you. All the best, The FA-Team 11:15, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

References

This article still badly needs referenced information, especially from decent, scholarly sources rather than websites. It's not as if this material is hard to find. I'm moving over to this page the "further reading," which should be read and referenced in the article itself:

Excellent!

This article is on the move. Good stuff. Keep it up! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 02:10, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Next step

Julie, Erin, and I are working away at this and are wondering what the next step is. We would love suggestions re where to improve, what else needs to be added etc. Thanks! Jenbren (talk) 02:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

The article is really shaping up. Congratulations! Here are a few suggestions:

You have added some scholarly sources, which is great. But given the amount that has been written about GGM, it would be grand to get some more. You rely very much on a relatively small number of books (Pelayo, Bell-Villada, etc.). A skim through Garcia Marquez's own autobiography would be instructive. But also some of the other books and articles out there, perhaps particularly on particular issues or books etc.

--Garcia Marquez's auto is on order from UBCO. Jgraworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

--It has arrived! Arantxa.rap (talk) 00:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Most of the new sources are good ones. The Modern Word isn't. Do try to replace this with better sources.

--will replace this Jgraworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

One section I'd add would be on GGM's influence or legacy: some sense of how he is seen as a whole, the mark he has made on world literature.

--adding section right now! Jgraworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

In the same vein, I think you could expand the section on style/themes, and perhaps divide it into subsections

-- J and J divided it into subsections- we will expand on this in the next couple days Jgraworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, several of these sections could be expanded. There are a number of one-word paragraphs. Understandably, the page often reads a little too much like a series of notes from the reading you've done. In addition to getting hold of your sources, you also have to present them, and come up with a coherent article.

-- working on bringing these together Jgraworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

But again, you've really given new life to this article. Keep it up! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 11:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

We are also hoping to get a few more pictures up - maybe of Garcia Marquez as a child, or in his youth... Could somebody please help with this?? Thanks! --Jgraworth (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Pictures would be nice, of course, but my understanding is that it is very difficult to get hold of non-copyright images, especially of a living person. This is unfortunate, of course. But my advice would be therefore that you do not worry about images at all. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 11:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Erin- please go through film- add some details and make flow a bit more!! Jgraworth (talk) 18:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Moving external links

These were on the page, but I'm not sure about their usefulness. I'm moving them here in case they become of some use...

Ghostwriting Gabo [Memoir Piece by David Unger at Guernica Magazine]
García Márquez, Gabriel at the Open Directory Project
Garcia Marquez at The Modern Word
Oprah makes latest book club pick
Documentary 52': Gabriel Garcia Marquez
The world according Garcia Marquez (in Spanish) by Piedad Bonnet - Icono Editorial

Otherwise, they can simply be eliminated, I think. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 11:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey! There are several sections such as "Death and Tragedy" are just blank. If there is nothing to put in them then they shouldn't be there! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.131.23.78 (talk) 04:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Reference formatting

Hi team, I started to do a bit of cleanup of the refs but have not finish. I noticed that you are using three time styles for referencing, and if you guys can agree on one then we can fix the rest to match. Here are the three the article is using:

Author surname, year, page <pagenumber>
Author surname, year, p. <pagenumber>
full reference, p. <page number>

I think either the first or second one is best. Please let me know what you would like to see and I will do another pass through the article and help you standardize. That way you can keep working on content. Karanacs (talk) 19:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello-- Thanks for noting this- lets stick to the second reference option: Author surname, year, p. <pagenumber> We will all try to make the changes too. Jenbren (talk) 20:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I've formatted the references per this style using {{Harvnb}} templates. This also provides links from the cites to the references. Geometry guy 22:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!!Jenbren (talk) 22:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Contadora Group

Garcia Marquez was one of the promoters of the Contadora Group.. any info about his involvement??--Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 10:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Awadewit

I'm impressed with how much has been added to this article! Thank you to the editors for their hard work! A couple of comments about the structure of the article first.

It is excellent that the article focuses on Marquez's writings, since he is a writer, but I think that the article would be more helpful to readers if it were structured around a discussion of themes and style OR around a discussion of the major works. Doing both might be overkill and will inevitably result in repetition or deficient explanations of both. The editors should probably decide what is best for Marquez. When I was working on the Mary Wollstonecraft article, for example, I decided I could discuss each of her works individually because she wrote so few. However, when I was working on the Anna Laetitia Barbauld article, I discussed her writings by genre because there were too many to discuss individually. A good example of discussing an author's writings by style and theme can be found at Balzac. Awadewit (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I would also suggest integrating the political opinions of Marquez into the body of the article rather than keeping them separated in their own section. Since no person's political opinions stay the same over time, it would be best to mention those opinions when they are most relevant to events in his life or most relevant to his works. See Joseph Priestley for an example of this kind of integration.

Working on these structural issues will allow the editors to better focus their research and writing efforts. Thank you again! Awadewit (talk) 17:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

GA Hold

I am placing this GA nomination on hold for seven days. I have identified some concerns with the article meeting GA criteria; if these are fixed within seven days I will pass this article for GA.

1. Prose: a copyedit wouldn't hurt. Some examples (all from the lead): "most well-known" should probably be "best known". A couple of usages don't seem precise to me: "renowned" for his political views? "Renown" is an unequivocally positive term; I think you need something that just indicates he is well-known for his views, not that they have led to a positive image. I'd drop "even" in "even been critical of politics in his native Colombia"; it's not that unusual for radical writers to criticize their own governments.

Striking; the points I raised are all fixed now. A copyedit prior to FAC is still a good idea; I will try to make a pass if nobody else volunteers, but a different pair of eyes is always good. Mike Christie (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Please be consistent about the Spanish or English titles: you use "Cien Años de Soledad" but "Love in the Time of Cholera". I personally don't mind which you use, but you should be consistent; I would think it would make the most sense to use the English titles, since that's the name under which most English readers will know these works.

I think I've made these consistent now. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good now. Mike Christie (talk) 17:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

There are some manual of style issues, but none I consider a show-stopper for GA.

Overall the prose is generally clear and accurate, and is good enough for GA generally. None of the above comments have to be fixed for GA.

Here are a couple of specific things that I feel should be fixed for GA:

~~"costeños" is used without a gloss or link; it needs some kind of explanation.~~
- we explained it, please let us know if this explanation is sufficient Jenbren (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. Mike Christie (talk) 01:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

~~There is no date given for the original publication of The Story of a Shipwrecked Sailor; just the republication date in 1970. I think the date is a necessary piece of information.~~
- Jenbren (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. Mike Christie (talk) 01:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

~~This sentence: "Some readers make connections link the novel to Venezuela where others envision the story unfolding on an island" is clearly half-edited; can you clean up the first few words please?~~
- fixed Jenbren (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
~~You currently have sections called "Solitude" and "Death and Tragedy" that are empty. If these are no longer needed, delete them; if they're needed, they need content.~~
- will complete this weekend Jenbren (talk) 01:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Striking, this has been done. Mike Christie (talk) 14:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

~~The quote in "Political Views" that begins "in the same way that" has no end quote; I assume it goes to the end of the paragraph, but I couldn't be sure so I didn't fix it myself.~~
- fixed Jenbren (talk) 01:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
~~What is the "Other" section under the list of works? If it's non-fiction, I think it should be labelled as such.~~
- labeled as non fiction need to check one listing under their Arantxa.rap to do Jenbren (talk) 01:41, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I believe they all qualify as non-fiction. The list includes journalism, literary and film critiques and his autobiography. Arantxa.rap (talk) 01:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good. Mike Christie (talk) 17:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

2. There are some facts I'd just like to see either better referenced, or else confirm that they are drawn from the references as given.

The last paragraph in Early Life gives a lot of details, but only contains one citation, to The Fragrance of Guava. Can you just confirm that that source contains the information in the paragraph? If not, I'd suggest adding a new citation for whatever source you used.
~~I think the sequence of events in the subsections "Marriage and Family", "Illness" and "Journalism" is a little odd; a chronological ordering would make more sense.~~
- we reworked the order of the headings and will be back to do more chronological editing within. What do you think of this? Jenbren (talk) 20:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

This looks fine; I've no doubt these sections can be improved but this is GA standard. Mike Christie (talk) 01:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

~~Can you provide a reference for the "36 million copies" circulation for One Hundred Years of Solitude?~~

Striking as the claim has been removed. Mike Christie (talk) 14:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Please provide references where there are "citation needed" tags.
~~There appears to be a problem with the "www.themodernword.com" citation; can you fix that reference?~~
- I think that's now fixed. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

There's still one left . . . . Mike Christie (talk) 01:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

it is now removed Arantxa.rap (talk) 01:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

OK. Mike Christie (talk) 17:45, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I have no substantive comments under heading 3-6.

Other suggestions, not necessary for GA:

You mention Pinochet under Chronicle of a Death Foretold. I think it would be worth pointing out that Pinochet was in fact still in power when the book was published; it's not clear from the current text that this is the case. (You might also wikilink Pinochet.)

This is more clear now Arantxa.rap (talk) 01:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that works. Mike Christie (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

That's it. I am not an expert on this topic, so I can't be sure about breadth of coverage, but it looks pretty good to me. The Nobel prize section is a bit short, but I won't fail GA on that. Overall this looks like good work, though the prose is choppy.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 03:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for this, especially for being so very speedy with the review. The editors have a really good sense now of where to go. They will of course also be taking account of earlier advice, too. But I'd say that a GA article is certainly very do-able. Thanks again! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I started to copyedit the Early Life paragraph, and noticed that, while the prose is very readable, it is not always encyclopedic at the moment. It is important to stick to the facts and not interpret them. Also this is another biography of a living person, so it is especially important not to make unsourced character assertions. Geometry guy 09:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Fact tag

There are fact tags on these sentences:

"The style of the novel has been labeled magical realism since there are many strange occurrences that are not treated as fantasy, but instead as a normal part of everyday reality.^[^{citation needed]}"
Furthermore, many of his novels and short stories integrate actual history as well as complete fabrication, making his genres often difficult to pin down.^[^{citation needed]}
In 2002, García Márquez published the memoir Vivir para contarla, the first of a projected three-volume autobiography. The book was a bestseller in the Spanish-speaking world.^[^{citation needed]}
On September 10, 2004, the Bogotá daily El Tiempo announced a new novel, Memories of My Melancholy Whores (Memoria de mis putas tristes), a love story that follows the romance of a 90-year old man and a drugged, pubescent concubine, was published the following October with a first print run of one million copies.^[^{citation needed]}

Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 14:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

PLAN FOR GA

Just going to make a list of what we need to do for our GA review. E and J please sign up for what you want to do and check off when it gets done... hopefully we can get it all done this weekend!!

1) SOLITUDE- I can start this up as I have a good book on it

done Arantxa.rap (talk) 07:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

2) Macondo

done Jenbren (talk) 01:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

3) Latin AMerican Experience

done

(NB you should sign in when editing and sign your talk page comments. So you can get the glory!) --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 06:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Jenbren (talk) 17:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC) (better?!)

4) reference 36 million copies

we couldn't find a valid reference (outside of amazon.com) so we erased the statementArantxa.rap (talk) 07:01, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

5) check citation needed tags

6) Work on prose---ie make flow!!

Jenbren (talk) 01:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Just quickly to add further congratulations. This article is really flying now! Well done! You guys started late, but have really improved it fantastically. Perhaps we can put it in for Featured Article status not too long after (crossed fingers) is passes GA? It would be grand to have this article, which is viewed by so many, really be excellent. Quite exciting, in fact. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it sure is. Unfortunately, one of your refs came from a site (indepencia.net I think) which has been blacklisted by Wikipedia (probably for spamming), so I've removed it. Good luck finding an alternative source. Also please try to keep the formatting of the citations consistent (e.g., small p for page) and don't display raw links: the template {{Harvnb}} and {{cite web}} should help with this. Geometry guy 10:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

GA redux

The only remaining obstacle to GA status is the [citation needed] tags. For reference, here they are:

~~"The style of the novel has been labeled magical realism since there are many strange occurrences that are not treated as fantasy, but instead as a normal part of everyday reality.[citation needed]"~~
"His pledge for support to the Puerto Rican Independence Movement was part of a wider effort that emerged from the Latin American and Caribbean Congress in Solidarity with Puerto Rico's Independence.[citation needed]"

When these are fixed I will pass the article as GA. Mike Christie (talk) 14:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

(The second of these is the statement sourced by the independencia.net link which I removed. Geometry guy 16:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC))

I removed this paragraph Arantxa.rap (talk) 17:43, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

ALL DONE!! Thanks for everyone's help! Jenbren (talk) 17:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The first one's done, but not the second one! Search for "citation needed" and you'll see it. Just that one left and you're at GA. Mike Christie (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking at that last cite needed, I'm not convinced that you really need the sentence that's being cited. If you want to cut it, instead of citing it, that's ok with me; it seems somewhat peripheral. Mike Christie (talk) 17:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

NOW we are all done! thanks arantxa Jenbren (talk) 17:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, everything looks good now. I've passed this as a good article; congratulations to everyone who worked on it. I hope to see this at the featured article candidates page soon. Mike Christie (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, many congratulations! Well done! And Mike, thanks so much for your marvellous help. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 18:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Many congratulations from me too. I have to say that since I started watching this article about a week ago I have been extremely impressed by the rapid progress. You should definitely be aiming for FA with this one: the ingredients are all there! Geometry guy 18:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Archive and on to FA...

Guys, many congratulations again! You deserve at least a little rest after your huge efforts. But next step... FA! It would be good to get some new eyes to provide feedback on what needs to be done for that. I'll drop a line (or you could) to the FA-Team.

Meanwhile, I've archived previous discussion, so we have something of a clean slate here. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 18:44, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

We don't normally archive quite that strongly on talk pages, so I've pulled back a couple of threads to give context, and because there's some useful information in some of them. Hope you don't mind. Geometry guy 18:48, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I realized that there was less to archive here. Apologies for being a bit radical on the archive front! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 04:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review request

I've put in a peer review request. Watchlist this page Wikipedia:Peer review/Gabriel García Márquez/archive1. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Next Step

Until the peer reviews come through does anyone have suggestions for our next step towards FA?? Thanks!! Jenbren (talk) 05:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

A quick answer: two sections that require some expansion are "Recent Works" and "Legacy." --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

And one more little thing: I just noticed that the McMurray text is an edited collection. So are all the quotations from that book taken from the same article? Is it the introduction? This should be clarified. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 06:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

okay thanks! will get right to it! Jenbren (talk) 06:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, read WP:LEAD, then read the body of the article without reading the lead section (the introductory section to the article). Then rewrite (and expand) the lead section so that it summarizes the rest of the article. Geometry guy 21:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Source and further thoughts

A couple of thoughts... Guys, I do think you should get hold of this:

García Márquez : el viaje a la semilla : la biografía / Dasso Saldívar. Madrid : Alfaguara, c1997. KOERNER LIBRARY stacks. PQ8180.17.A73 Z9265 1997.

This is the major biography to date. (NB as I understand it, Gerald Martin has been working on an authorized biography for years, but it's not out yet.) I know it's in Spanish. And I also know that you spent three months in Mexico last year, so you should be able to get the gist! If there are specific sections that you think are important, or particular quotations you want translated, you can bring them to me.

I also think you should try to do more with Living to tell the Tale. In general, you probably don't need new sources (though they never hurt) so much perhaps as to do more with the ones you have.

You actually don't have much about his life after 1950. There should be more on this. For instance, how he wrote Cien años on a diet of black coffee and cigarettes in Mexico City... his friendship with Torrijos (as well as with Castro)... and again, his impact (which has, after all, been huge). --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 10:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer review

Just in case the editors haven't watchlisted the peer review page, I left a peer review here. Awadewit (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Possible FAC nomination

I gather from jbmurray that the editors here are interested in an FA nomination. I think it's a very realistic goal, even though the deadline of April 10th is fast approaching.

If you want to have a successful FA nomination in the short time remaining, I'd suggest that the most important issues raised in the peer review are these:

focus on the works by genre or by style; as Awadewit says the article may be trying to do too much as it currently stands, and it is hard to avoid repetition. Organizing by style/theme and following with a list of major works seems reasonable, but this may take some talk page discussion or a face-to-face meeting of the major editors.
expand the legacy section
improve the lead

The above three seem the main problems to my eye. Two more that are important but which should be easy are to mention the dates of his major works in passing in the "life" sections, and to fill the gap between 1975 and 1999. If he just lived quietly and wrote in Mexico City that whole time, say so, but the gap should be covered.

Awadewit's other points have real force but are probably less important to go to FAC, though you'll need to think about them. Personally I'm not sure about the Political Views section; I think it works, but others may agree with Awadewit. Expanding the film section would be useful, it's true; and avoiding primary sources in the life section would certainly improve the reliability, but the importance of doing this to some extent depends on the nature of the information you're taking from the source. E.g. a story about GGM as a brilliant scholar should be sourced elsewhere, but his grandparents' names could come from the primary source without too much trouble. The copyediting points should be addressed too, but if you run out of time you could nominate and deal with them in the first day or so of the nomination.

So if you want to get to FA, I think it's very doable. I will complete another copyedit pass tomorrow and see what I can fix from the peer review, but the article is in good shape, and having copyedited this once already I may be blind to its faults. If you decide to go to FAC, I think we can dig up a copyeditor for you.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 04:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I will have to respectfully disagree with Mike here. Despite all of the hard work that has been put in on this article, I do not believe that the substantial changes that need to be made for FAC can be done in three days. Rewriting major sections - such as the sections on the author's works - just three days before FAC nomination is not a recipe for success. Major revisions like that take time and careful consideration - I urge the editors to take that time. Also, expanding the film section is necessary, since Garcia Marquez was a screenwriter - the section does not just address adaptations of his works. Finally, biographical articles cannot be sourced to autobiographies. I was forced to oppose another biography article on just these grounds - FA articles must use the most reliable sources for every part of the article. I cannot stress that enough. Again, thanks for all of the hard work that you have put in and I hope that you stay around after the semester and keep improving the article! Awadewit (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a comment on the last of these issues. As I mention above, for some reason there is (to my knowledge) no biography of GGM in English. And while personally I'm not so convinced that autobiographies are such poor sources (so long as their autobiographical provenance is always stressed, of course), it's true that I'd expect a featured article to have shown evidence that its editors have consulted the Dasso Saldívar text. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Although I've seen major changes successfully done to FA candidates in days, I'll bow to Awadewit's experience here; she knows far better than I do what it takes to make a good literature article. I think if the students had more Wikipedia experience, and had nothing else to do between now and Thursday, it would be possible, but I wouldn't want them to try for something that is not realistically achievable with the time and resources they have. Mike Christie (talk) 09:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

There has been some decent progress here over the past week or so, but in the end it looks as though the article will not go forward to FAC, during the lifetime of the Murder, Madness, and Mayhem project at least. It would be nice if this article were to become a Featured Article, however, and perhaps the MMM editors (and/or others) will return to work more on this important figure of twentieth-century world literature. Well done for everything that's been done so far! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 11:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Expand sections

There are a lot of articles about Garcia Marquez in other languages specially Spanish, these are valid if properly cited. There is also little criticism to his literary work in this article.

I also suggest creating the Timeline of Gabriel García Márquez, it will be easier to determine his life whereabouts.

Useful links

I am trying to find a pic I have with him.. I'll upload it as soon as I find it.

--Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 16:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

How would you format a timeline like this? Are there some examples on wikipedia you can direct us to? Thanks, Arantxa.rap (talk) 21:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Similar to this one.. Timeline of Colombian armed conflict --Zer0~Gravity ^{(Roger - Out)} 21:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm, I'm not sure that such timelines are so useful for biographical articles. We had one in Augusto Roa Bastos, and (wisely I think) deleted it. Also I should point out that the editors here already have access to some very reputable sources via their university library. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 22:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Another theme / source

Another theme in GGM is writing. We covered some of this in terms of "writing and power," of course. But people are endlessly writing and/or reading in his books. There are a bunch of essays about this I've seen--one I think on the role of letters in Crónica as well as other texts--but above all I'd recommend you take a look at Roberto Gonzalez Echevarría's Myth and Archive. (Which is, incidentally, one of the best books about Latin American literature as a whole.) PQ7082.N7 G68 1990 in Koerner's. Out at the moment, but seriously overdue. There, there's a whole section about the "archive" in Crónica above all. But see also discussions of Melquiades's book in Cien años. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)