Talk:Julia Alvarez/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

See the GA criteria.

Well written:

• "her scholastic improvements came in the way of storytelling"; this is a slightly clumsy phrase. Do you mean that she learned to be a storyteller while at school?
• "The goal of the movement was to overthrow the dictator through revolution." This doesn't really add anything to the previous sentence except the word "revolution"; I'd cut this. Done
• "In How the García Girls lost their Accents, the family lived in a compound surrounded by a high wall and secured by an armed private guard." I'd move this sentence out of the biography section and into the section on her works.  Done
• Is "the Dominican" a standard way to refer to the country? I'd have thought it would be "Dominica" or "the Dominican Republic". If this is standard, that's fine, but it reads oddly to me.  Done
• The second paragraph of the biography is good material, but it might flow a little more smoothly if you moved some of the straightforward narrative to the top. Right now the reader has to wait to the end of the paragraph to get the factual information: she went to a Catholic school till she was 13 and then to a boarding school (also Catholic?); she went to the Dominican Republic every summer (where did she stay, by the way? and who with?). Once you've established these things in the reader's mind, the discussion of alienation and her exposure to the two different cultures is much clearer to the reader.

I don't agree with this, I think it wouldn't flow if we moved the information around. This way ti is in chronological order and the reader would be confused if it wasn't.--Julie17 (talk) 18:38, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

OK. I'm not completely convinced but I think it's a matter of opinion and isn't necessary for GA. Mike Christie (talk) 03:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• "unique and vast" is a little too approving for NPOV. If you really want to assert that I think you'd need to make it a direct quote and attribute it inline; better would be to drop it -- the reader can decide if it's unique, or vast; and you can quote critical opinion on the point later in the article. Done
• "she continued her studies in such institutions as": why "such ... as"? Were there other institutions that we don't know the name of? If you just mean she went to Connecticut, Bread Loaf and Syracuse, make it "continued her studies at". If there are gaps, ideally you'd say what they are.  Done
• "After acquiring her Master's degree"; can we put a year on this? It's followed by "...these years" without a date so it would be good to slot the reader into the right decade, at least (presumably the late 1970s).  Done
• "She attributes these years for providing her with a deeper understanding of America and developing her didactic nature." A couple of problems with this sentence. The verb "attributes" takes "with" more naturally than "for", but if you use "with" here you'll have two "with"s in a short space: "She attributes these years with providing her with" which would be ugly.  Done A second issue is that "developing her didactic nature" is a bit vague. Do you mean she acquired teaching skills? Or that she discovered she liked to teach? I'd recast the sentence to resolve both problems.  Done
• "After her work in Kentucky, she extended her educational missions to California, Delaware, North Carolina, Massachusetts, Washington, D.C., and Urbana" Evidently she did not do this under the aegis of the Kentucky Arts Commission; I think it would be good to say something about how this happened, even if you only say "Further grants from other educational institutions allowed her to " or something like that. More details would be better, of course, if you have them. Or does sentence actually refer to the same info given at the start of the next paragraph? If so, there's a bit of redundancy here.

  The above is not necessary for GA. Mike Christie (talk) 02:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• Also, I think "missions" is a bit strong. Best to replace it with something that gives a better idea of the actual nature of the work -- writer-in-residence, visiting writer, temporary teaching position, whatever it was.

  I changed missions to "endeavours"--Sauceyboy (talk) 00:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• "As a professor of English at Middlebury College, she teaches...." She appears to no longer be there, and besides, the reader just got told she was a professor at Middlebury, so shouldn't this read "At Middlebury, she taught..."?  DoneEhager (talk) 21:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
• "It was here her poems became increasingly more popular". Cut "increasingly" or "more", whichever you prefer; also, it wasn't at Middlebury they became popular, it was while she was at Middlebury. I'd rephrase it to "It was during her tenure at Middlebury that her poems" or something similar. Done
• "the book details themes of cultural hybridization in postcolonial contexts": I think you want a different verb than "detailed"; and "cultural hybridization in postcolonial contexts" is a little densely packed. Done

  I agree, it is way too verbose. --Sauceyboy (talk) 19:50, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

  Your revision is a definite improvement. You can't avoid polysyllables in an article like this, of course, but I think you're back under the limit now. Mike Christie (talk) 01:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

• "Alvarez discusses the smooth integration of the Latina immigrant": I don't think "discusses" is the right verb for a fictional work; she can "illuminate", or "take as its theme", via the book, but "discusses" takes us out of the fictional world and into direct author address of the reader. (I'm assuming there's no Brechtian address to the reader going on in the book; I haven't read it.)  Done
• The sentence beginning "Further enhancing" appears to be incomplete.  Done
• "Alvarez's remarks on the hybridization of culture is often conveyed": "are often", of course; but also "remarks" is not quite right -- see the comment about "discusses" above. Perhaps "opinions" instead?  Done

• "It offers a complex narrative with insightful prose": I'd attach a citation to something as approving as this sentence; the next citation appears to be strictly for the subsequent direct quote.  Done
• "Her historically rooted writings edify the public of": "edify" is a poor choice here; I don't think it takes "of", anyway; it should be "about". I think you mean something like "educate her readership about". Done
  • I changed this to "inform." --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
• "yet simultaneously not 'authentically' representing both fully" is rather unmusical; less than three "-ly" endings in six words would be good. Are those scare quotes around "authentically"? If so, I think they should go. Done
  • I've fixed this in a way that seems to be more in line with the subsequent quotation. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
• "poses as a theme": I think you just mean it "is" a theme; if not I'm not sure what you mean.
  • Fixed. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 03:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
• "social activism and aid": does "aid" refer to things like famine aid appeals? It's not clear. I can see how Alvarez could critique social activism, but do you really mean she critiques the act of giving money? Or is it the culture of things like "Band Aid" that she talks about?  Done

I don't really think that the reader would be confused with this --Julie17 (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

• Probably not, though I think a clearer phrasing is possible. I've struck this. Mike Christie (talk) 03:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• "she paints a portrait of a women": singular or plural? Done
• I didn't like the paragraph that starts "In response to a question"; I looked up the source, and I think you could make better use of that paragraph in Sirias. Sirias says that students frequently ask the question; I don't think that's as interesting as his observation that she recoils at the idea of being ethnically pigeonholed. Regardless of what you do with it, I think the current formulation is a bit clumsy.  Done
• The sentence about Garcia Girls being the first major novel in English by a Dominican seems out of place in the "Influences" section; perhaps move this to "Literary work"? Done
• The four sentences that start "In this writing, Alvarez..." are all cited to one reference; in a situation like this you only need to put the cite at the end of the last sentence. (It's not wrong the way you have it, it's just easier on you.) Done
• A separate issue is that these sentences aren't very easy to read. I tried a copyedit but a couple of obscurities stopped me. Here's what I got: "The novel deals with issues of ethnic identity. Alvarez undermines the notion that multiculturalism is always a positive, and makes the case that much of an immigrant's sense of identity is unstable, and is strongly affected by the ethnic, gender, and class conflicts of the surrounding culture." Two problems: I couldn't insert the "expressing 'trouble' as a theme" part because I didn't understand it, and I also am unsure what you mean by saying that an immigrant's sense of identity is unstable. Could we be more specific about this? It sounds like a key theme, and some direct explanation would be good here.  Done

  I tried to make the concept of 'trouble' clearer. Ehager (talk) 21:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

  Looks like you just cut the parts I mentioned; that's good enough for now. Mike Christie (talk) 02:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• Almost half of the "Influence" section is direct quotation. This is too much; the quotes are informative, but some of them need to be digested and assimilated into a description of the influence she has had. I don't know what a target number is, but I think if you can get it down to about a quarter of the text that would be a big improvement. Done

  I shortened them by summarizing what she said and leaving only the more important parts in her own words. Do you think this is substantial, or would it be better to shorten them more? Ehager (talk) 22:19, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

  As far as I can tell you didn't paraphrased "Here, I am writing in English often about Dominican situations and characters, using Spanish as part of my English--those combinations are happening all over the planet, as populations are on the move." and left the rest of the quotes unchanged. To be honest, I still think there's too much direct quotation. If this is the last issue left, and the only thing stopping the article from becoming GA, I will think about whether I can pass it, since the quotes do cover the material. I think it's a real weakness in the article. Mike Christie (talk) 03:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I got rid of the majority of the second quote. Do you think it is better now or would it be better to get rid of it all together? Ehager (talk) 04:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC) I made changes to this over a week ago and haven't heard back. Do you think it is ok now, or do you have any more suggestions as to how I can make it better? If this is what is holding the article back from "good" status, I would very much like to know how it can be improved upon from here. Thanks. Ehager (talk) 19:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I've been slow responding; my own fault for not keeping an eye on this page well enough. I thought you were still working on it. Yes, I think this fixes the problems with the quotations; personally I'd cut more but this is enough. I think this is very close to GA now; I'll take a look through and see if there's anything left and post a follow up shortly. Mike Christie (talk) 03:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

• I don't really understand this sentence: "Through Alvarez's writing, she aims to widen the spectrum of authors not just writing books that cater to women, but cater to universal themes that illustrate the interconnectedness of all humans." "Widen the spectrum of" means "increase the variety of different kinds of", but I don't see how her writing could do such a thing. I am also confused by "cater to universal themes"; what does it mean to cater to a theme? I also don't see the reason for "universal" paired with "that illustrate the interconnectedness of all humans". Universal themes, to my mind, means the basic themes of human life: love, death, tragedy, desire, sacrifice and so on. I suppose these illustrate the interconnectedness of human life, but I'm not sure why that would be noted in a discussion of Alvarez, so perhaps I'm missing something.

  Personally, I don't see anything wrong with this. To me, it makes sense, and like you said, universal themes means themes of human life, love, death, tragedy, etc. which is exactly what Alvarez writes about. Perhaps I should make these themes more clear, but aside from a few minor changes in the language, I do not this it is necessary to change. Ehager (talk) 22:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

"Universal themes" is OK, then. What do you mean by "widen the spectrum"? That was one of the things I didn't understand. Mike Christie (talk) 23:15, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

What I am trying to say is that as a female writer, it is often assumed that her writings only address issues that women face. To counter this, Alvarez aims to widen the spectrum of, or "increase the variety of different kinds of" themes in her works to address issues that not only affect women, but humanity as a whole. Does this make sense, and do you think that I can write it in a way that it clearer to the reader? Ehager (talk) 17:25, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

OK, I follow you now. I see that Jon's fixed it while we were discussing it; it now reads "Alvarez claims that her aim is not simply to write for women, but also deal with universal themes that illustrate a more general interconnectedness." That works for me, if you think it conveys what you meant. Mike Christie (talk) 01:53, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Other issues:

• The image of Alvarez has a tag saying it has insufficient copyright info. I've asked another editor to let me know what the right way to fix this is; I'll let you know what I hear. The image should also have a caption.

  Here's the answer, from Awadewit: "This image needs an OTRS ticket from the copyright holder, which is presumably the photographer. See WP:COPYREQ for instructions and WP:ERP for sample letters." Let me or Jon know if you need help with this. Mike Christie (talk) 12:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

  I've struck this as the image has been deleted because of the copyright problems. However, I see the other image still does need a caption. Mike Christie (talk) 03:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

• I noticed one of the citations spells her name "Álvarez", with an accent; is this correct? Should it be spelled that way throughout?  Done
• There are several "page # needed" and "citation needed" tags; these all need to be fixed.
• In "Early life" the inline parenthesis "(Something to declare 116)" should be formatted as a citation.  Done
• The section on "Influence on Latin American literature" doesn't actually talk about her influence very much. The first paragraph, and the McCracken quote, are on topic; the rest is more about her own writing than her influence. Would it be better to drop this section and merge the material with the "Themes and Styles" section? If her influence on Latin American literature is genuinely significant, though, you need to cover it, and this doesn't appear to do it.

I really don't think those two would fit together. Would it be better if we maybe re-titled that section?--Julie17 (talk) 05:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

With regard to the quotes, I want to make one more point. Some of your quotes are very apposite, and are helpful to the reader. For example, Alvarez's comment that literature became her "portable homeland" is concise and memorable, and definitely worth quoting directly. But what does the reader get from a quote such as "often called upon to entertain guests"? Keep the pithy and memorable material, and rephrase much of the rest.

• From "often called upon to entertain guests", the purpose would be to desmonstrate to the reader that from early on in her life she possessed natural storytelling abilities and talent, which is of course what has made her name in the reading world. I would argue that it is extremely beneficial, but if you're sure that it's so unmoving I will remove it.--Sauceyboy (talk) 19:40, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

  I see your point, but I think it can be made without the quote. This is a personal opinion and not something required for GA, so leave it if you prefer it as it stands. However, as it stands the quote didn't have the desired effect on me; in fact the quotes around a fairly straightforward phrase distracted me from the significance. The requests for her to perform don't have to be quoted for their importance to be conveyed. How about a paraphrase such as "Dominicans place a high emphasis on great story-telling, and Julia, who soon became skilled at reciting poetry, was often asked to perform by guests"? As I say, this is not needed for GA, though. Mike Christie (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

That's everything I see. I will take another pass through and may add more if I spot anything. Please ask if anything is unclear, and of course if you disagree with anything above, please say so; you don't have to make every change I suggest just because I'm the GA reviewer. If I'm wrong, or if you think something is merely a matter of taste and you prefer your version, point it out.

In the meantime, I'm placing the GA nomination on hold to give you time to fix the issues.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 01:40, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Dan and Emily: could we place a  Done in the points that have already been fixed? That way we won't waste time trying to locate them in the article. --Julie17 (talk) 20:27, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

What's left for GA

There's a citation needed tag. That's the only thing standing in the way of GA at the moment. If you can fix that, either by removing the material and the tag, or providing the citation, I will pass this as GA. Sorry about the delay over the last week or more; I didn't realize that this was ready to be looked at again. Mike Christie (talk) 03:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mike, I removed the information that I couldn't find citations for and added the available ones. --Sauceyboy (talk) 05:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. I'm passing this; congratulations, and sorry for the delay. Mike Christie (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

GA Status!

Hooray girls, we did it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.86.200.232 (talk) 13:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)