Talk:Cristina García (novelist)

Change Cristina García title?
Why is Cristina García listed as a "journalist" rather than a "novelist" in the main title of her entry? According to the entry, García stopped working as a journalist in 1990 when she began working as a novelist full time. I'm new to editing or I would attempt to change the title myself. ENG233 (talk) 20:17, 8 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ENG233 (talk • contribs) 18:45, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cristina García (journalist). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029193238/http://www.post-sixties.com/ to http://www.post-sixties.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:32, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Unsourced changes
could you please provide the source or sources from which you are gathering information that you've added to the article? It's very tempting to change much of it back, since you haven't mentioned any references to support it.&#32;-- Fyrael (talk) 01:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the message.
 * I'm new to editing. Which pieces of information need sourcing? Much of this seems fairly evident -- books from major publishers/publication dates, etc.
 * Thanks! Bulldogbrown60 (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The ones that jump out at me are changing her father's nationality and the list of universities where she has worked. I'm also concerned about this "overt and propagandistic politics" statement. Did she really describe her own work that way? Seems surprising.&#32;-- Fyrael (talk) 02:04, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Also apologies on the threat to "change much of it back". Sometimes I go overboard trying to coax new editors into communicating, which can be difficult. Thanks for being collaborative.&#32;-- Fyrael (talk) 02:06, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello, and thanks for the quick reply.
 * To be frank, I'm actually acting on behalf of the subject, who was distressed at the number of errors on the previous page and asked me to take a look and dive in.
 * So I'm not sure how these points can be cited since this is knowledge that she's provided, and to boot, that I've long known, too. For example, the subject provided the fact her father grew up and was a citizen of Cuba, despite his partial Guatemalan heritage.
 * Likewise for the quote: the subject told me she was misquoted and that the edit reflects what she really said.
 * The list of universities she also provided.
 * Again, I'm new to this but quite happy to do my bit to straighten out the previous factual errors, and provide what sourcing I can.
 * (And also to upload a new infobox photo that was provided. I don't know how to technically do this!)
 * Thank you again!
 * Scott Bulldogbrown60 (talk) 02:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah....this is what I was afraid of. First off, editing articles about yourself, someone you're close to, or your company is deeply frowned upon here, and you should read more about that at Conflict of interest. To be blunt, Wikipedia's goal is to reflect what's found in published, reliable sources much more so than what the subject believes is accurate. If you can find sources that verify these changes, that's great, but otherwise some of it may need to go back (like you said, the additional works are easy enough to look up though). We cannot simply take on faith that information being told to an editor is accurate. It's actually a core tenet of Wikipedia: WP:VERIFY. I hope you can understand.&#32;-- Fyrael (talk) 04:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello,
 * So in this case, should I have the source -- Cristina Garcia -- contact you directly? Just this evening, we were texting about how it was, that even with Wiki's supposed strict standards of publication, so much misinformation and outright factual errors were contained on the old page. So perhaps these standards were upheld, but it in terms of presenting neutral, non-opinionated fact, the resulting page was kind of a disaster, containing big errors (title of "journalist") to small (she never lived in Manhattan).
 * That is, like the old saying: The patient died but the surgery was a success.
 * But briefly: which facts in the edits I published need verifying? And secondarily, how might I upload a new photo for the infobox? I'm having difficulty understanding the upload procedure.
 * (btw, as a former journalist, and longtime university academic, I'm well aware of how tenuous the legitimacy of so-called "published, reliable sources" can be. As such, accurate sourcing is merely a tool for accuracy, and secondary to the overall goal of presenting factual information. It's like another old saying: Don't believe everything you read).
 * Anyway, please advise on what you need. I think we all want an accurate page, which is not at all what the previous entry was. Bulldogbrown60 (talk) 05:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)