User talk:Seto58

models
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
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) 08:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

FA-Team
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) 20:18, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

happy face!
You get my happy face for your work on Sandra Cisneros. Keep it up! --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:43, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

progress?
Seto58, 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) 00:28, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Lead etc
Hi Seto58. Your improvements to the lead are excellent - you write well, and the rest of the article would benefit from your touch too ;) There's still work to do (I've left further comments in the pre-GA checklist I've posted on the article talk page) but the lead always seems to be the hardest part of the article to get right. You're off to a great start though.

Your hard work in improving Wikipedia's content (and incidentally passing your course!) is much appreciated. All the best, EyeSerene talk 14:42, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! You're right, I made the lead more of an introduction than an overview, I will work on fixing this. I'm going to tackle your pre-GA checklist, which is certainly daunting, but we'll do our best! Seto58 (talk) 23:11, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Seto58

Sandra Cisneros update
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! EyeSerene talk 15:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Sandra Cisneros
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)

Re striking comments...
Thank you for your continued work at Sandra Cisneros - I think it's really shaping up into a high-quality article. Regarding striking out comments, it's normally best left to the user who added the comments to do that because it indicates that they're satisfied the comment has been addressed. I don't mind because we're all working together on it anyway, but when we get the GA review the GA reviewer might - it's a bit of a wikiquette faux pas ;) Best regards, EyeSerene talk 08:55, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Ahhh. Sorry about that, I thought the purpose of striking was just to say "I've done it!" If you haven't already I can unstrike what I've done today so that you can address the changes I've made. Glad you're liking the article! Seto58 (talk) 09:03, 19 November 2008 (UTC)Seto58


 * No problem - I did that too when I first started editing, for exactly the same reasons as you! Most reviewers just prefer a note under their comment saying "done" or something, so they know to go back and check it before striking it - there's also a template which produces: ✅, if you prefer (just type ✅ ). However, I've made some formatting tweaks to the talk page, so no need for you to go back over anything ;) EyeSerene talk 09:39, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

heads up
See here. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 13:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Got it. I'm going to address these today in my sections and I've emailed Heather and Valerie. Seto58 (talk) 20:46, 20 November 2008 (UTC)Seto58

Reorganisation
I like what you've done with the article - wish I'd thought of that :P EyeSerene talk 08:45, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! It suddenly became clear that it made more sense there, plus it will hopefully solve our little gap between eleven years old and full fledged writing career issue. :) Seto58 (talk) 08:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Seto58


 * I think it really helps to fill the gap. Nice work ;) EyeSerene talk 09:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

You did it!
Congratulations on getting Sandra Cisneros through GA! You've earned yourself one of these:

which ( if you like) you can place on your user page by copy/pasting   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 ;) EyeSerene talk 14:13, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help!! Seto58 (talk) 22:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)Seto58

ArbCom elections are now open!
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) 13:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)