Talk:One Hundred Years of Solitude

PROJECT PROGRESS

WEEK ONE

hello everyone :)

so here is kinda what we thought would be good to attempt for the first week on working on this

• 1) PAIR DOWN THE CHARACTERS-----basically this article is saying who the characters are... dont need it all!
• 2) WORK ON THE INTRODUCTION-----make sure the introduction is clear, contains needed information not just random who reall cares kinds info.
• 3) EXPAND ON PLOT SUMMARY------maybe work on a few paragraphs vs one line

Improve introduction

Mention magical realism Awards for work Impact and importance Introduction of major + importance Position in Latin American Literature and author Marked as a ground breaking novel to the magical realist movement

Expand Plot summary

Pair down characters

Reception is super important to this article

So if you do anything to the article just post your changes on in this section :) thanks and have a great weekend laura--Laurarosenielsen (talk) 21:14, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Might I suggest waiting to work on the "introduction"? The opening part of the article (called the "lead" on Wikipedia) is ideally supposed to be a summary of what is in the article. This is much easier to write once the rest of the article has been improved. Awadewit (talk) 04:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Is it just me PATRICK or did someone delet our plot summary?? how are we supposed to do this if it can get changed whenever?--Laurarosenielsen (talk) 23:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

(Laura, I moved your comment down, so that the dates progress in order and it is easier to follow the discussion.) Yes, anyone can change the article - that is actually a benefit as many improvements happen this way, as you yourselves are improving it! Whenever you want to return to a version from the past, just go to the "history" tab and go through the various versions. I found one with the plot summary and added it back. If you want an earlier version of the plot summary, you can go further back in the history. See Help:Page history for how to use this feature. Awadewit (talk) 03:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey There

Hey guys. So I'm thinking about working on the historical context of the story and criticisms. What do you guys think?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brhoads2 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

The historical context looks very generic (the reader would be better off just reading the Colombia's history article.) Instead, I think it should refer to specific historic episodes and people:

1. The one thousand days war, 1899-1902
2. Rafael Uribe Uribe
3. The Banana Massaccre, 1928

I agree the historical context is both too generic, and well as overly detailed and too long. Its drags out the first half of an otherwise good article. I think it should be shortened by at least half, with links to relevant articles. Possibly moving it to later in the article would help the articles flow. Is it standard for historical context to precede plot in book articles? It seems to me that while establishing context would naturally precede an analysis, in this case the content is heavy going and best fitted next to the chapters on themes, intepretation and significance. +|||||||||||||||||||||||||+ (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Meeting

Me again. So it seems as though we need to meet up. If any of you guys see this and agree, let me know so we can try to arrange some sort of meeting. Thanks!--Brhoads2 (talk) 23:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the main thing we need to work on for now is the references. The top of the page says that we need more sources for verification. Wikipedia will obviously not give us a Good Article standing if they themselves are telling us to provide more sources. I am free to meet up Friday, Sat, Sun, and Monday... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patricklivemon (talk • contribs) 08:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you. It shouldn't be too difficult to get this thing polished off. Sunday works best for me, if that's ok. Maybe at IK Barber? --Brhoads2 (talk) 17:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I can meet on Sunday morning or afternoon, however, that means that we are leaving it to the last minute once again, which Jon said we should not do. So after looking at the article for a few minutes just now, I think we need to make the table of contents shorter and there ar etwo parts about history that need to be combined and/or pared down. Trimming the table of contents might be tough because someone seems to be pretty happy with their list of characters and wants it to stay the way it is. So, while we may not be able to eliminate the list of characters, I think we should remove some of their headings so that only first gen., second gen. third gen., etc shows up in the table of contents so that it's not so overwhelming. I'm sure there are many other things that we will need to do, so please post your thoughts on this, and we can all work on it individually before getting together on sunday to polish it off.--Aellingboe (talk) 19:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I can meet tomorrow too if anyone would like. Either way, let's plan on meeting at 10 am at IK Barber. I don't really understand why the table of contents needs to be shortened . . . I don't know how that really reflects the article, but if you really think it will help we can do it. What I think really needs fixing is the lack of sources. Many sections have no citations at all, and every other "good" page I have looked at has almost every sentence cited, even if the article itself isn't very long. So maybe we could all work to get more sources. And feel free to change the history section in any way you see fit! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brhoads2 (talk • contribs) 00:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Improving the Article

I trimmed down the table of contents because it says it should not be overwhelming in the featured article criteria, which the link to is right here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria. I'm sure it will help us out. I definitely agree about adding more citations. I can't meet tomorrow unfortunately. --Aellingboe (talk) 08:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)