Talk:Tomás Rivera

Plan
This is where alannaj and trowan are going to put their plan... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:55, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

So far, our plan will include the following steps

1)	First, we will have to fill out the page and add more categories to the site

2)	We need to find more resources on Rivera’s life and his works

3)	We hope to do a summary on “…y no se lo trago la tierra”

4)	The first section to fill out will be on Rivera’s early life and biography and hopefully to combine his “life” and “legacy” sections into one a.	Also, we hope that his ‘life section’ will have some sub-sections

5)	In addition to the article updating, we would like to try and find some pictures of Rivera and maybe some book covers too.

6)	While expanding the articles, we are going to try and tie in themes from other readings by chicano/a authors and then link the article to others

7)	We will most likely combine the “works” section and the “criticisms” sections since they are very small and have very little detail

8)	We will create a section for Works, but will hopefully have sub-sections within this that will include his novels, poetry, non-fiction, and films

9)	Also, as far as the “civic activities” section, we would like to re-work this into the ‘life section’

10)	We need more references and articles still but have collected some so far and would like to use as wide a variety of English and Spanish articles

Some of these may change as we progress but essentially we are hoping that with these changes to the article that we will be able to upgrade it to something that people will want to read and will want to use as a reference

--Alannaj (talk) 04:09, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like a good plan. You can of course add to it over time.  And cross things off when you've done them, including adding a big green checkmark ✅ ✅.  --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Progress?
Guys, it looks as though this is the only edit made by the WP:NRG group to this article over the whole of the semester so far.

This is not enough! We need to see some progress. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 10:04, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yay, congrats on making a move! More needed! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 19:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * And I'd add that these additions need to have citations to reliable sources for the information. (See your bibliography, above!) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:59, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

sourcing problems
Are you sure that the source that you added here is the right one? If so, we will need the relevant page numbers, as this is not, so far as I can see, an online text. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 22:32, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

i put in the names of the authors and they are in my bibliography, should i put in the URL instead? --Alannaj (talk) 21:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * We're talking about "Martinez and Lomeli, Chicano Literature: A Reference Guide," right? What is the url? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 00:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, now I see that the source in question is in fact the following: However, as I say above, really, this isn't a great source. It's a textbook, and in any case only has a paragraph or two (on page 20) directly about him. I wouldn't use this. We can leave the information in for now, but ''you are going to need better sources than this before you put the article up for good article nomination. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Jeffers, Robinson. American Passages: A Literary Survey.  pg. 20.   (In fact, this reference is wrong.  The text is not by Robinson Jeffers.  Indeed, it's not clear who the author is.)


 * What's more, this is not a good source, either. However, it has a bibliography: Julio Martínez and Francisco A. Lomelí, eds., Chicano Literature: A Reference Guide (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood, 1985). (You seem to be confusing the bibliography with the webpage.)  You should order the book via Inter-library loan (as it isn't in our library). --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 18:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Guys, it's November 9th, and your article has exactly one reliable, well-referenced source, though that is only a one-page introduction in an anthology. You must do better than this. What about using some of the sources in the bibliography that you compiled six weeks ago?? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 07:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

film reference
You may or may not want to use this reference about the film. I've taken it out of the article for now. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Lattin references
As this is an edited volume, we need to be sure to be referencing the individual articles. So it's not enough to simply put "Lattin." It must be (say) Smith, with a reference below to Smith's essay, with its title and page numbers etc. --03:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Upgrade
I've upgraded this article to C class. There's still some ways to go, but well done on the recent progress! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 20:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

To do
OK, as I say, this article has really improved recently. Well done! Above all, you have replaced almost all of the earlier poor references with much better ones. Excellent. Here are my thoughts about what most obviously needs to be done: But again, this is really motoring. Well done and keep it up! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:48, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
 * You might think more about the article's structure. I just moved things around a bit, to make sure that the "Legacy" section was last, and to consolidate what you have to say about his literary career, for instance.  But I think some more could be done here.
 * The "Literary career" section and the paragraph on ...y no se lo tragó la tierra could definitely be expanded.
 * There are still some sources that you collected earlier that are not being used. I'm thinking especially about the ones directly on ...y no se lo tragó la tierra, which can be used to expand and develop that section.
 * You need to expand and develop the lead.
 * You need to beware about repeated the rather hagiographic tone apparently adopted by many of your sources. To take one obvious example, you right now state that "Rivera lived an extremely productive life, constantly working to better the quality of life of the people around him."  At best, you should put something along the lines that "Many of his colleagues, such as X, regarded Rivera as living..." and then provide a specific reference to this claim.

Hi everyone, jbmurray asked me to review this article for you. I've brought my share of articles to GA and FA and I frequently review articles at FAC. My comments will be similar to those you would get at FAC. I am not familiar with the article subject, so I'm probably your target reader anyway! Overall, I think that the article is a good start, but it still needs quite a bit of work. It reads too much like an essay rather than an encyclopedia article. I understand that is can be difficult for you as students to write in the non-essayish style, because that goes against what you have been trained to do. It is very important, though, that this article be in the encyclopedic style. Overall, that means: a) present facts and let the readers draw their own conclusions b) don't present opinions as facts c) use neutral language rather than overly effusive compliments and d) provide enough context so that the readers can come to the same conclusions (show me why he was great, don't just tell me that he was great). From reading this article, I do not understand why he is important for his writing. More explanation would help. The following are more comments, some very nitpicky. Don't lose sight of the fact that you are doing a good job so far (reviews generally focus on the room for improvement, not the stuff that is already good). I I am watching this page, so feel free to ask questions here about the review or anything else about the article-building process and I'll try to answer. Karanacs (talk) 16:57, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * In the first paragraph of the lead, I would wikilink Southwest Texas State University and University of Oklahoma (because you have linked university names later). Also should be consistent on the name of the first school; in the lead it is Southwest Texas State and in the body it is Texas State University - San Marcos.  I'd use the former, because the name wasn't changed until very recently.
 * In the lead, wikilink the first instance of Mexican Americans rather than the second.
 * Should Chicano be capitalized or not? Both variants are present in the article.
 * "explains the exhilaration he got from writing so early on in his life" - Several sentences later, this "exhilaration" is mentioned again, but the paragraph doesn't really explain this.
 * Any detail on what type of writing he did as a child - keeping a diary, fiction, ... ??
 * "he was no longer permitted to miss school." - permitted by whom?
 * Did Rivera have any siblings? Where did he stand in the birth order?
 * Make sure that all citation needed tags are removed - either by citing the information or by removing it.
 * Do you have the years of graduation from Southwest Texas and Oklahoma? That would help the reader figure out how long he worked between the two and how long it took to graduate.
 * The organization is a bit off. The first section mentions some of his education, and then the second section goes into more detail on his education.  They could likely be combined.
 * The tone of the article is not quite at the "encyclopedic" level. Some of it seems too flowery.  For example, "It was customary for Chicanos of the Midwest to literally live and die in the fields, a common occurrence that Rivera included in ...y no se lo tragó la tierra. Despite that his Chicano culture was rooted in migratory field work, Rivera not only graduated from secondary school but moved quickly through his post-secondary education"  could possibly be (provided the sources support it): "Although it was rare for a migrant laborer to achieve an education level beyond XXX, Rivera graduated from high school in Texas in 1954 and immediately pursued further education."
 * Does the source say how he managed to teach at League City while attending school in San Marcos? That is a several hour drive each way if he was doing that simultaneously.
 * Any information on when he moved to Oklahoma?
 * " He filled several administrative positions" -- where? At Sam Houston State or at UtEP or somewhere else?
 * "before becoming the Executive Vice President " - was it "THE" Executive VP or "AN" Executive VP?
 * I'm a bit confused on the chronology in 1978-1979. He worked at UTEP, then quit to work for a Mirror company, then left to become Chancellor of UC-Riverside?  Any information on why he left education briefly?
 * Any mention in the sources of anything special he did in his university administrative work? What brought him to the attention of UC-Riverside as their chancellor?
 * The Literary career section should likely go above Civics.
 * In the Civics section, some of the organizations he served on have their own Wikipedia articles. It might be useful to link to some of them.
 * This type of commentary "Rivera lived an extremely productive life, constantly working to better the quality of life of the people around him." - is opinion. To remain in the article, it needs to be cited to a particular person who said it or wrote it and should be placed in context, with examples of specific things he did.
 * I think there may need to be more context in the article about the way Chicanos were viewed in the US at this time. I am sure that Rivera had to overcome significant barriers and prejudices.  The reader needs to learn of these so that his process of overcoming them becomes more clear - and the reader gains more respect for his accomplishments
 * What is the "Quinto Sol Award "?
 * I think that in the Literary career section, his works need to be mentioned and described first, with the award later. In the current setup, as a reader I find out that he won an award, but I still don't know why.
 * Probably don't need to include the titles and translators of his works in the main part of the article. Perhaps that detail could go in a footnote, with the main part of the paragraph just saying "The novel has been translated into English several times."
 * Watch for words that convey an opinion..."Interestingly" usually not a good word, as it shows a point-of-view, and the article should be neutral.
 * This is very vague - "Rivera contributed greatly to the literary world, " - contributed how? What impact did his prose and poems have?
 * The description of ...y no se log trago la tierra doesn't tell the uninformed reader enough about the book. What is special about it?  why did it win an award?  Expand a bit on the differing narration forms.  How rare is that technique?  In what ways was the book, its content, or its style revolutionary? Was any of it autobiographical?
 * How did his book and poetry collection sell? What was the reception by critics?  Was he well-known for his writing in his lifetime or was it posthumous recognition?  What impact did his works have on other writers or on the genre?
 * Do you have any information on his poetry? That is not really mentioned in the body of the article, just in the lists of works.
 * In the legacy section, remove the "as mentioned above" parenthetical reference, as well as the one to "his hometown"
 * The first paragraph of the Legacy section is essentially a large list that needs to be broken out a bit. I don't understand the bit about a children's book being named for him, and an honorory doctorate could not have been named for him - I assume that means instead that he posthumously received an honorary doctorate? Separate out the bits on doctorate and distinguished alumnus
 * Need citations for some of the stuff in the first paragraph of Legacy
 * How did he die? He was very young. Don't refer to his death as "tragic" without some pretty good context.
 * Some of the legacy stuff might be bordering on trivia. It is probably not that important that a tutoring center was named for him, etc
 * This is blatant WP:POV = "The contents of this archive provide evidence to his hardworking, selfless and motivated nature" - this article is not a memorial; instead, show the reader what he did so that they infer that he was hardworking, selfless, and motivated - let the reader draw his own opinion, don't present someone else's opinion as fact.
 * don't refer to his wife as "Mrs"
 * Encyclopedia articles should not end with a summary (unlike an essay). The last paragraph of the Legacy section needs to be rewritten.


 * Some discussion of the children's play "Tomas and the Library Lady" - based on the story of Tomas Riviera as a young boy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.222.193.101 (talk) 02:00, 4 February 2013 (UTC)