User talk:Valerie voikin
|
Almost there!
[edit]Almost there, Valerie... Now you just have to sign up for a group here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 07:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
models
[edit]To have a sense of what you should be aiming at as you work on your article, you are advised to look at relevant good articles and featured articles. A recent featured article about an author is Mario Vargas Llosa, for instance. This was written by a UBC class last semester. You may also want to consult the Literature Wikiproject. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 09:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
reminders: regular editing and plan
[edit]Two reminders, from our project page:
Over the course of the semester, you need to log in and make at least one edit, again however minor, to your article twice a week.
By September 19, each group should have their plan in place, and have written it up on their article's talk page.
--jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Another reminder about regular editing: So far you have only made two edits. Do get up to speed... If you are having any problems, please drop me a note. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Becoming an established user
[edit]im trying to edit my page but i cant. WHY IS THIS HAPPENING TO ME?!?!?!?!?!?! JOHN!!!!!!!!!!! PLEASE HELP ME FIGURE OUT HOW TO EDIT MY PAGE!! OR I WILL FAIL THIS CLASS AND NEVER GET OUT OF THIS SCHOOL...AAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valerie voikin (talk • contribs)
- And remember that you should be signing your contributions to talk pages. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Valerie, I've fixed this. The problem was that you had only made six edits over the whole semester. The page was limited to people who had made at least ten. This is why I said you should make some edits to your user page or elsewhere in Wikipedia, such as adding to the bibliography on the talk page. (Remember, in any case, you're supposed to be editing at least twice a week. See the reminder above that I left you two weeks ago.)
Once you've made at least two more edits, I'll probably add the protection back. I added it so that you would not be bothered by vandals coming in and adding nonsense. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Valerie, the problem's fixed. There's nothing to stop you adding material to the article... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 08:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
In fact, now you've made over ten edits and so become an established user, I've re-added protection. For some reason this page attracts vandalism, like this and this. Protecting the page against edits by anonymous IPs and new users means you don't have to worry quite so much about that. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:29, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
FA-Team
[edit]We have been adopted by the renowned FA-Team! Please add the project page to your watchlists, and feel free to ask FA-Team members if you have any queries or need help. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
October
[edit]Valerie voikin, after a burst of editing a little while ago, it's been nine days since you added anything. What's up? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:46, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
progress?
[edit]Valerie voikin, I'm a touch worried... As is verified in our progress reports, the rate of advance of Sandra Cisneros is slowing down... from 69 edits in the first period, to 30 and now 20. C'mon, don't give up... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:29, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
jon, i just edited on sunday!!!! its coming along...dont worry...it'll be done...but I DID EDIT ON SUNDAY!!!WAS THIS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valerie voikin (talk • contribs)
- Hi. First, I was referring to the collective efforts on the article: the numbers are above are the total edits over the period. It's great to see the article coming along. Second, you can see your own logged-in edits by clicking "my contributions" at the top of the page, which leads you here. This shows that on Monday you were editing from 5:47pm to 6:21pm. Keep it up! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:29, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
question answered
[edit]Hi. I answered your question here, and observed that you need to provide the full reference to this Ganz text in the References. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 02:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
Your recent edits
[edit]Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 22:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
Re your questions...
[edit]I've noticed jbmurray has helpfully(!) removed all those sources you found... unfortunately, he is right about the reliability of most of them. We ideally need sources that are fact-checked, peer-reviewed and respectable, so things like books and academic journals are much preferred to websites for the most part. Some websites are fine, but it depends very much on the site itself, the site's publisher, and the content author(s). If you feel like having another go at sourcing, I'm still happy to help with the formatting.
Regarding a picture, I've commented further on this in the checklist I've left on the article talk page. If you have something in mind, we need to check the copyright and licensing before we can do anything else with it, so if you can provide a link or description of where it's from I'll try to help out.
You're all doing a really good job on the article - on behalf of Wikipedia, your hard work in improving our content is much appreciated ;) EyeSerenetalk 14:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Sandra Cisneros update
[edit]Thank you all for your hard work in addressing my pre-GA checklist! I think the issues I raised have now been dealt with, for the most part, and any remaining points can hopefully be sorted out during copyediting... speaking of which, I've made a start, and I'm leaving questions, comments etc on the article talk page for your expert attention. I hope you're not put off by yet more things to deal with - it's the way Wikipedia editing tends to work, with articles growing by increments as they're constantly revised and improved.
Your contributions so far have been really excellent. I'm enjoying working with you, and looking forward to seeing how far we can take this article. I've noticed that jbmurray has put in the nomination for Good Article assessment, so we're approaching the first big hurdle... but I'm confident we'll clear it successfully ;) Best regards, and I'll look forward to handing out some shiny stuff in due course! EyeSerenetalk 15:55, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Guys, EyeSerene is afraid that you've disappeared after his patient review of your article. Do engage with his comments and continue the improvement so that you can pass the Good Article Review. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:19, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
heads up
[edit]See here. While an article is up for scrutiny in this way, you need to be on the case. You did some good work about ten days ago but nothing since... Some effort now will save the nomination! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 13:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Well done!
[edit]Congratulations on getting Sandra Cisneros through GA! You've earned yourself one of these:
 | This user helped promote Sandra Cisneros to good article status. |
which (if you like) you can place on your user page by copy/pasting {{User Good Article|Sandra Cisneros}} into the page code.
It's been a pleasure working with you, and of course I'll be happy to help if you're planning to take the article further. Great work ;) EyeSerenetalk 14:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)