User talk:Mfreud

Yup, you edited El Señor Presidente. (And you'll see that some other wikipedian added some more subsequently.) Keep at it! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking good so far! I've skimmed over the Plot summary you wrote and conducted a light copyedit - I hope you don't mind. The main thing I noticed was use of phrases like "The reader witnesses...", "We are taken to..." etc. It's usually best to reword these in a less personal way - for example "The author describes..." or "The story moves to..." You have excellently avoided the single biggest problem we see with with plot summaries though, and that's writing them in-universe. Don't worry too much about the comment left by another editor in the article markup, about not including too much plot description. It looks to me like you've got the balance about right - and we can always trim it later if need be ;)

One thing I wanted to check with you: is the 'newcomer' called "Miguel Angel Face", or is that a different person?

All the best, and keep up the great work! EyeSerene^TALK 13:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the newcomer is Miguel Angel Face. Thanks for all the help and advise, I stopped working on the plot summary because I wanted to double check I was more or less on the right track. Thanks so much for taking the time to help me out!--Mfreud (talk) 21:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hey,

i corrected a few spelling errors in this section, but i was confused about a few of the quotes. some don't have starting or ending quotation marks, and i think one needs a citation. i hope i didn't read it wrong and fix something that didn't need changing, but you should probably take a look at it. :)

Eecono (talk) 06:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sure, i'll take a stab at it. :) i read the comments on the article's discussion page and i'll try and work on rewording and decreasing the amount of directly quoted material as well. i also started proofreading, in hopes that it will make the article that much better. :) also, (after just reading comments on needing to shorten the plot synopsis) what are your thoughts on maybe giving less importance to the more minor sub-plots? the summary i started on part one kind of glazed over the more minor characters...

Eecono (talk) 00:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

finally got it up, sorry for the delay. :(

it's a bit longish (about the same length as part two, so it probably needs to be cut down). but a lot of important things happen in part three, so i didn't know where to trim the fat. i know one of the editors said 900 words was a bit long, so i'll try and find something to edit out. anything else that needs to be done?

Eecono (talk) 04:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! Hope you don't mind me leaving this here, but the article talk page is getting a bit cluttered and I didn't want to add to it... the downside of collaborative writing!

One of the in-line citations, "Strömberg, Kjell, 'The 1967 Prize', 174" (used three times in the Nobel Prize section) seems to have lost some detail. Or maybe it was never there to begin with - I don't remember to be honest :P However, there is no matching entry for this citation in the References section, so this needs to be added in at some point.

You're all doing a brilliant job on this article - it's a pleasure working with you, and hopefully you're enjoying it as much as we are! EyeSerene^talk 19:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, why not? We've made a nice confusion of the article talk page, so let's see if we can explode over the rest of Wikipedia too :D

I had a feeling that ref was complete at one point. If you don't feel like tracking it all down again, we could trawl through the article history and try to find it... that may take some time though!

You're more than welcome for the help! It's quite exciting seeing an article go from conception to birth to adolescence to maturity... and there's the added motivation that your work will be here, in some form, for the foreseeable future. You'll quite likely even find it being used and cited by future students... and it's quite cool when an article you wrote comes in top of a web search. Have you tried googling "president novel"? You're on the front page already!

You're all coping brilliantly with responding to the review; it's easy to feel overwhelmed with everything, but you're taking it one point at a time which is the best thing to do. As you've noticed, GA isn't just a rubber-stamp, and Jacky is a very thorough and experienced reviewer. If you need more time he'll understand - don't be apprehensive about dropping a note on his talk page. We're making great progress though, so hopefully he'll be happy to pass the article within the next few days.

Best regards, EyeSerene^talk 19:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article was included in a copy of The President which itself was included in a book that contained the Nobel Prize winning works of three authors. That was the extent of the citation information I could get from the article and I wasn't really clear how to cite an article within a book, because I've never encountered a similar citation and couldn't find an MLA equivalent. If someone could tell me what information I need to include or how I can go about correctly siting it, it would be much appreciated. Also, the book is from the West Vancouver Public Library (because I was staying there over Reading Break), so I won't be able to access the actual book until Easter Break. I can try and find it in the library catalogue, but other than that my hands are pretty much tied. Sorry, I'll do what I can.

Eecono (talk) 05:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elyse, if you can find it in the library catalogue, so we have the book title at least, that would be great! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I managed to find from the library catalogue: the title is Nobel Prize Library: Miguel Angel Asturias, Jacinto Benavente, Henri Bergson and it's part of a series of Nobel Prize winning works. This is a link to the library catalogue citation: http://catalogue.westvanlib.org/search/Xtitle:(asturias)&SORT=D/Xtitle:(asturias)&SORT=D&SUBKEY=title%3A%28asturias%29/1%2C3%2C3%2CB/frameset&FF=Xtitle:(asturias)&SORT=D&3%2C3%2C

and I found it on google books, but it's not very complete information: http://books.google.ca/books?id=RV44AAAAIAAJ&q=asturias:+nobel+prize+library&dq=asturias:+nobel+prize+library&pgis=1 Like, I said, I can't get to the book until Easter Break, so I hope that's enough for now. Eecono (talk) 05:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Elyse, that's very helpful. I've added the information. Ideally, we'd also have the editor (if there is one) and page numbers. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry this probably isn't wikipedia worthy, and a bit late into the process, but could you add me on msn or facebook or some other form of communication so i can keep in better touch with you? thanks. :) Eecono (talk) 05:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Novels Project is a Wikipedia group dedicated to improving the quality of articles on novels. If you would like to help, please consider joining: seeWikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Members. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think first of all congratulations are in place, you guys got yourselves a GA article now :D great job. seeing that article go from non existence to what it is now in such a short time was quite something, keep it up :). I can't say i'm really a MoS expert but I'll do what I can before the FA nomination, I'm a fellow literarure undergrad so school keeps me busy but I'll find some spare time :) Acer (talk) 18:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, congratulations for getting The President to "Good Article" status. If you want, you can now put this on your user page:

This user helped promote The President (novel) to good article status.

--jbmurray (talk|contribs) 19:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mf, thanks for the note, but I'm so busy, that it can be hard for me to carve out time to help others learn the ropes, other than sample edits now and then. Be sure to follow my edits and edit summaries, as I left samples there. I hope you'll approach Epbr123 (talk · contribs), who is very knowledgeable on MoS issues, and may have time to help you all learn the ropes. I'll pop in as I have time, but ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:34, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on the GA; it's been a pleasure working with you! Looking forward to more to come ;) EyeSerene^talk 10:44, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words, and since you've offered I'll be proud to have a GA userbox for The President too! All the best, EyeSerene^talk 10:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mfreud. I watchlist SandyGeorgia's user page, so I saw the message you left for her. I just wanted to say that, for a new user, you are doing really, really well. Most newbies don't know to leave a link to the article, and you remembered to do that, which puts you a step ahead of the rest already :) Don't get discouraged by the MOS; I've had 6 articles pass through FA, and I still sometimes run into an MOS issue I've never heard of before. Karanacs (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Exceptional Newcomer Award
		For so quickly learning how Wikipedia works, contributing so much wonderful content that will enrich the world, so eagerly participating in our community, and introducing me to a fascinating novel (!), I bestow this award upon you. Awadewit (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Wikipedian! EyeSerene^talk 16:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations: this is much deserved! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 17:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, your spelling is quite something, Mfreud!! Anyhow, this diff makes me wonder as to what the author's name really is: Barrueto or Barruento? It'd be good to have some consistency.  ;) --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whenever you're ready, press the button! I think you're ready. Mike Christie (talk) 18:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about to go into a meeting, so unfortunately I can't. I also wonder if the page is going to end up being moved (again!) to get rid of that dangling "novel"; I noticed that question on the talk page just after I left you this note. I suggest we leave it till that's settled; probably this evening but maybe earlier.

I'll be happy to put this up at FAC for you; it's actually quite easy (the instructions are at the top of the WP:FAC page) but I must admit I made a mistake the first time I did it. When I get out of my meeting I'll check in again. Later -- Mike Christie (talk) 18:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated the article for you. Don't worry about making mistakes - people will always fix them (usually graciously). I also made sure that you got credit for the nomination here. If you want to add anything to the nomination statement, please do! Awadewit (talk) 19:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Literary Barnstar
		This award is for your work in helping El Señor Presidente along the road towards its Featured Article Candidacy. Well done! jbmurray (talk|contribs) 20:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This, Mfreud, was a remarkably eloquent pitch! Well done! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 00:20, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gguy's being facetious :) There's been lots of history of accusations of bias on Wikipedia, including over the topics covered in featured articles on Wikipedia's main page, and it's kind of become a meme. It's an extra bonus for your articles that they're not about Anglo subjects, because with most of WP's editors being from English-speaking nations (no surprise really, it's the English Wikipedia!), our coverage of other areas is not as comprehensive as it should be. EyeSerene^talk 19:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi -- I saw your blog post about Wikipedia, and I wanted to make a couple of comments. First, and most important, I'd like to say that whether you decide to do more on Wikipedia or disappear and never come back, you've already had a positive impact. As jbmurray said, your team's article on El Señor Presidente is probably the top resource on the web for this book. Your article will be consulted by many undergraduates who will be grateful for your research; you've improved Wikipedia and all of us working on this encyclopedia are glad of it.

Second, I'd like to comment about the image issue. In some ways, this sort of thing is the reason the FA team was formed. There are a lot of persnickety little policies and details in the manual of style, and in the copyright policies. The point of the FA team is that we don't expect you to deal with those issues. We are looking for people who know content. It would be fine, in my opinion, if you were never to look at the FAC and only look at your talk page for editors from the FA team to ask you any questions they couldn't handle. We know perfectly well that those interactions are tricky, but passing these hurdles is a technical issue. (I can explain just why the image issue is a big deal -- if you care.)

In your blog, you say you're disappointed that "the content of our article, which has been supported for FA is not what really matters at the end of the day"; but this is not the case. The content does matter, and if you had it wrong, you'd see comments at the FAC about problems. You're not seeing those, because you've done a fabulous job.

Personally, when I send an article to FAC, I am quite happy if I see technical complaints such as image problems. They're often easy to fix; in the case of an image one can just remove the image from the article, and that solves the problem. When someone says "you haven't covered this topic in enough detail", that's a much bigger problem to solve.

Enough rambling; I just wanted you to know that your work is indeed valued, and I wanted to suggest that you don't assume that the debate at FAC is an index to the value of your work. It's been a pleasure to have your group here on Wikipedia, and we all hope to see you again; and if you don't come back we will still enjoy the article you wrote. Mike Christie (talk) 01:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I would like to second Mike Christie's comments here about the FAC process. If the only thing people found to complain about was the images, it means you guys did a wonderful job! See here, for example. This article was clearly not prepared and the reviewers saw that. Your work on the article was stupendous - for someone who has never edited Wikipedia to work together with others to bring an article up to FA status in just a few months is an amazing accomplishment. You should be proud of all of the work you did and happy that so much useful information has been contributed to the encyclopedia. Awadewit (talk) 02:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI - I've promoted El Señor Presidente to FA status. Raul654 (talk) 01:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mfreud, please see what Raul654 says here. I think you should be the one to decide what day you would like El Señor Presidente to be featured on Wikipedia's main page! Drop him a line... And congratulations once again! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 02:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A minor note: Please don't choose April 16. That is the one-year anniversary of the Virginia Tech Massacre. Otherwise, you should be ok. Wrad (talk) 03:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little nudge here, as I realize that you may not have seen my message in the avalanche that you received today! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 06:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to put this on your user page:

This user helped promote El Señor Presidente to featured article status.

. Get rid of that ugly green thing that there at the moment.  ;) Congratulations!

Yes, congratulations. Terrific work!

Big congratulations!! You guys are the first students of the first educational project to ever manage a featured article thats quite something :D Acer (talk) 01:53, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Well you just got your own shiny featured star and you're going to the main page on a date of your own choosing and your article was Wikipedias 2000th featured article... But all thats nothing compared to the The Great Revolving Barnstar of Tirelessness, Congratulations :D Acer (talk) 02:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fabulous! I hope you appreciate just what an incredible thing you've accomplished here, and I hope you're not going to be too modest about it ;) I don't have the words to express my admiration, respect and gratitude for all the work you've put in... Kudos! EyeSerene^talk 07:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message! It's been a pleasure, and you fully deserve to reap the rewards. I'm glad my help was useful, and hope you don't feel that I abandoned the article once we'd got through GA. To be honest, once Awadewit and others were on the case I had no further concerns, and it can be counterproductive to have too many hands in the pie, so I thought my time would be best spent with some of the other articles that weren't as far on as yours. I hope you're not feeling too burned out, and you'll stay with us after your assignment ends, but if not it's still been a great experience and we've got some excellent articles for posterity ;) Best regards, EyeSerene^talk 10:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the blurb that will appear on the main page on May 5. Raul654 (talk) 06:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on your FA status and getting the article on the main page! I just wanted to encourage you to come back and read the article again on May 6. Main page articles usually attract a lot of vandalism, and while various people patrol and revert the obvious stuff, sometimes subtle vandalism slides through. As the expert on the subject, you are the main person who can identify that type of stuff. You really did a tremendous amount of work. It is very rare for someone's very first WP article to be promoted to FA status, especially not on its first try. I hope you don't get too discouraged by the image argument; images are a contentious issue on WP, and most of us are clueless on the policies. Overall, your nomination sailed through pretty easily - if the only arguement are about images it generally means they couldn't find anything else in the article to complain about ;) Karanacs (talk) 19:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you know, I'll be watching the article from here on out - warding off of the vandals. :) Awadewit (talk) 19:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did the hard work, Mfreud. You very definitely deserve to be proud of this!! Karanacs (talk) 01:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Copied from my talk page:) Cinco de Mayo sounds grand. Actually, doing a little research... another possibility would be April 22 or 24. The first is the 10th anniversary of the publication of Guatemala's Truth Commission. Two days later is the 10th anniversary of the assassination of the assassination of the Bishop who oversaw the project. Let me check the exact dates, as there seem to be some contradictions.

I've also been very pleased about the featured article status. And have told plenty of people, too! You really, really deserve it. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:04, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, I think it's quite troublesome for Raul to change the date once he's scheduled something. If there's a really good date, then suggest it, but otherwise I'd say leave it at Cinco de Mayo -- that's a pretty good choice. Mike Christie (talk) 19:23, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Normally that is completely true - having the 3 "recently featured" articles at the bottom means that anytime I move articles around, I end up having to change 4 or more blurbs. However, this is an usual case because I went ahead and write it up so far in advance that there's no blurbs scheduled around it. So moving it is easy ;) Raul654 (talk) 19:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Copied from my talk page:) I know... first Celine Dion, now JK Rowling! But we're changing things around here.  ;) --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm I am the same Mfreud as created wikinews:User:Mfreud --Mfreud (talk) 16:06, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vancouver Meetup Please come to an informal gathering of Vancouver Wikipedians, Monday, May 5 at 6:30 pm. It will be at Benny's Bagels, 2505 West Broadway. We'd love to see you there, and please invite others! Watch the Vancouver Meetup page for details. This box: view • talk • edit

Mfreud! How did you enjoy your day on the main page, eh?! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 05:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(copied over from my talk page:) Hey, does that mean you're signing up for my class in the fall? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:26, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done! JACOPLANE • 2008-07-3 15:43

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]