Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Featured articles/FA-Team/Mission 1

message: Jbmurray has put a progress report here.  To help us identify who's keeping an eye on which article, we have the front page of this mission page, which shows who's watching the articles.  The progress report gives jbmurray's suggestion as to what's needed next.  I suggest we use a similar checklist to see who can pay attention to which articles over the next week or two.  By the way, I thought someone said that April 10 is the deadline for FAC nominations, but WP:MMM says that that's the deadline for the project, not just nominations.  Jbmurray, can you clarify?  If the final deadline is April 10 we are running out of time.
:April 10 is the deadline for nominations.  (I admit that at the outset of the project I was not 100% clear on the way in which FAC worked.)  So it's the last day, for the purposes of the class at least, that students can put their article in for either FAC or GAN.  NB I'm discouraging completely speculative nominations: articles should only go through if they're ready.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 15:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to be able to do the GA review on Latin American Boom this evening.  That just leaves Feast of the Goat as the only one that doesn't have an FA-team member focused on helping out; if anyone can spare time for a look over there that would be great. Mike Christie (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Skomorokh has picked up the GA review of The Feast of the Goat, so every article has someone looking at it now.  Mike Christie (talk) 02:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which articles are getting attention 

message: Just a little plug for GGM... the editors here feel that they've been a little neglected by the FA-Team, the poor dears.  ;)  So if someone could drop them a note, they'd very much appreciate it.  They're certainly keen to take their article up to the next level.  (Heh, and I think you might just have some new long-term wikipedians on your hands there...)  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 21:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I owe the Sarmiento page a significant amount of work so I won't be able to do this for a couple of days at least. Mike Christie (talk) 21:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: They are doing such a good job on their own, they probably have been a little overlooked.  I'll try to drop by tomorrow. Karanacs (talk) 21:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I did just glance at my GA review notes and I believe a copyedit is in order; "choppy prose" was in my notes. Mike Christie (talk) 21:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll do one of my thorough reviews tomorrow. Awadewit (talk) 22:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Karanacs has hit it on the head - they should feel complimented that they've been doing such a fine job that we haven't felt obliged to intervene ;) EyeSerenetalk 14:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gabriel García Márquez]] 

message: Might I suggest that we start awarding barnstars? Does anyone else remember getting their first one? :) Awadewit (talk) 18:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea, and I noticed you've already kicked things off ;) Do we award them as the FA-Team, or as individual editors (and thinking of that, maybe an FA-Team specific award might be nice), and are there criteria that should be applied in deciding on what goes to who? EyeSerenetalk 11:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We could do it individually or as a team - I don't know if it matters much. I just started giving them to people I saw working hard. I was hoping that editors working on other articles and familiar with the editors there could do the same (I've been working on The President (novel) a lot, so my vision is myopic at the moment). Awadewit (talk) 11:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I gave out a few to the editors on the pages I've been working most closely on (Vargos Llosa and Asturias).  I think we ought to design a barnstar specifically from the FA-Team for the editors of any articles which reach FA status. Karanacs (talk) 18:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Awards 

message: I've GA reviewed Dictator novel, and I'm a bit dubious about three non-free images (book covers) that are being used to illustrate one of the sections. They lack proper FUR's, but putting this aside for now, what I'm after is another opinion regarding their presence in the article. Can it be justified under 'Fair Use'? (I suspect not...) All advice gratefully received! EyeSerenetalk 17:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they can easily. They fit the same criteria in this article as they do for all the other articles they're in. Wrad (talk) 17:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Drop a note to  to look at all the articles, since he'll most likely be looking at them at FAC, and he's good.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:00, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suggest that using three covers is too much given Wikipedias minimal non-free use goal. The President seems to be the one whose publication and impact is most thoroughly discussed. I'd add an FUR for that and cut the other two images. Geometry guy 15:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for all the advice. Per Sandy, I've asked Elcobbola's opinion too, & I think the upshot is that all three images will have to go. I agree that if any of them should stay, The President is the one, but I can't really make a case for even that under FUR, as it brings nothing to the understanding of the article (it is purely, as Elcobbola puts it, eyecandy). I do appreciate all the help! Cheers, EyeSerenetalk 17:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

text:  Bump my reminder above:  check with Elcobbola pre-FAC !  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second opinion requested re 'Fair Use' 

message: As I mentioned to project members (aka the class) today, wikipedia's featured content today gives us new motivation to work on making these Featured Articles.  Though I also mentioned that there wouldn't be too much difference: Ms Dion has been busy torturing people for quite some time, too.  ;)  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 00:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha. Wow. Every time I hear that Titanic song... Wrad (talk) 01:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Move Over [[Celine Dion]]! 

message: The status section above was getting a bit cluttered, so here's a new one.  I have tried to figure out the current situation for each one; please update if I got anything wrong.  I've also tried to indicate a couple of places where FA-team members could help.  If you would like someone from the FA team to drop in on one of the articles you're watching, please add a note here on what's needed. -- Mike Christie (talk) 15:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think The General in His Labyrinth would have a pretty good shot with a little polishing (though I'm worried by the removal of the section on symbology - the source may not have been up to snuff, but I couldn't see a gaping hole in the conclusions, and the deletion leaves it less than comprehensive). Yomanganitalk 23:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We are definitely still wanting to get FA status (at least Carlaty and I)! Sorry, I know we've been making very small changes, but we've (again, Carlaty and I) both have two other huge group projects due on Thursday, so that's where our focus has been. However, we do hope to at least get FA nomination by Thursday, and then we'll be back at it! I do still have the section on symbology saved on my computer if there is consensus that it should be left on the page. Eshiu (talk) 22:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent!  :)  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 22:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

text: A status overview: at least three that I know of are very close to GA status: I, the Supreme, Dictator novel, and Latin American Boom.  Qp10qp is helping out on Augusto Roa Bastos but tells me there's a little more to do.  If all those four pass, that would be eight at GA and probably one (or perhaps two) at FA, which would be a very impressive outcome.  The remaining three are Facundo, Miguel Ángel Asturias, and The Feast of the Goat; since the deadline of April 10 is for nominations rather than for final status I think these can still make GA if the students have time to work on them. Mike Christie (talk) 10:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated article status 

message: Well first of all thanks to Karanacs (as well as everyone else) for the continued input towards improving this article. On behalf of our group, this article has somewhat become our baby and we would love to be able to meet the FAN April 10th deadline. We've tackled many of the issues that SandyGeorgia, Kaldari, Karanacs, Outrigger and Acer have brought up. We would definitely appreciate more feedback and input on both how close we are to FAC and what we can do to achieve that. Also, the 3 of us are completely lost when is comes to MoS issues, so any help on that would be greatly appreciated as well. I pretty much have this week off and will be putting an immense amount of work into this article. Lincolnchan98 (talk) 20:27, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: is usually very prompt about MoS edits; if you drop him a note, I'm sure he'll run through quickly.  I'm pretty sure you're not supposed to do this:  Patricia Llosa (1965–)  I think it's supposed to say (born 1965), but that's something to check with WP:MOS.  The most important thing is to deal with the citation needed tag; otherwise, the issues I raised on PR were addressed.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

text: The date is when they were married, not her birth. Still, I'm not sure if that's right, but that's what I gathered from the WP:MOSNUM, "In the main text of articles, the form 1996– (with no date after the en-dash) should not be used, though it is preferred in infoboxes and other crowded templates or lists, with the caveat that they may need to be examined by editors more frequently to see if they need to be updated". Maybe (married 1965)? Lincolnchan98 (talk) 21:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

text: There isn't that much MOS stuff left.  I've fixed everything I've seen as I reviewed. Karanacs (talk) 21:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have already promised to review the article tomorrow - I will attempt to do it in the early afternoon, before I teach. Awadewit (talk) 21:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

text: By the way, G guy said above, "I would hope that the FAC process would be tolerant of an article which is not quite 'there' being nominated by an enthusiastic and dedicated bunch of editors."  Far less prepared articles have appeared at FAC, and gotten featured in the course of the FAC.  It's a harder way to do it, but not undoable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks Sandy, I hoped you would comment on that! Articles can be fixed during FAC, but it isn't easy, so those groups that want to do it need to have a well-prepared article already, sources to hand, and a love of hard work :-) FA-Team members are ready and willing to help in any way they can! Geometry guy 21:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I meant to comment sooner.  But,  my watchlist and talk page are getting harder and harder to keep up with.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the two articles I reviewed has just passed GA (congratulations to Cndbaconeh, Lpotto, and Rosefinn) and the other should pass shortly, so I have some spare bandwidth to help at Mario Vargas Llosa.  If Lincolnchan98 is willing to put the work in, I think it would be fun to see how close we can get.  After all, it doesn't have to be nominated till the evening of April 10th.  Awadewit's comments about how difficult this will be should be taken seriously, but we have dedicated content editors and the FA team know what they're doing.  I say let's give it a shot. Mike Christie (talk) 23:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: For what is worth I'll jump in on this one too. Tommaso also said he wants to try and go for it see here - Acer (talk) 23:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Thanks for that.  In return I'd say that the students need to make their own commitment; we're here to help if they want to do it, but there should be no pressure.  We're here because it's our hobby: we don't mind if they're here because they want to improve the grade, or because they're in danger of becoming addicted just like us; and if they have no more spare time then that's fine -- we hope they enjoyed the work we did together.  But if they really do want to keep going, we'll be very glad to work with them. Mike Christie (talk) 23:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now reviewed Mario Vargas Llosa and left some suggestions for improvement here. Awadewit (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: How close is [[Mario Vargas Llosa]] to FAC?

message: I wonder whether there are side effects when the FA team adds a half-dozen supports at a FAC for an article in a mission we've been working on.  On the one hand, I think all of us who put in a support are doing so because we've read the article and honestly believe it is worthy of promotion.  There's no misrepresentation going on.  However, what does that look like to others who aren't on the team?  There have been negative comments at FAC in the past about Wikiprojects piling support !votes on.  Sandy certainly knows how to ignore them when they aren't substantive, but I wonder if there's a better way.  For example, what if the first FA team member to support puts in a support !vote that says something like: "Support.  This is a great article.  It is one of the FA team articles from mission 42." and then other FA team members who support can add "Agreed; support as a member of the FA team" indented after that paragraph (and without bolding, as Sandy searches for bolded !votes to help her keep track).  Or is that bending over too far backwards to avoid falling flat on our faces? Mike Christie (talk) 19:37, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should disclose as normal.  Support <blah blah>.  Disclosure: I did a peer review.  etc etc.  Karanacs (talk) 19:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're worried about precedent for future noms and setting a good example, it would be helpful if you all added soemthing. If you're worried about these noms, no problem; I know who worked on them and I'm watching for contributor as well as independent support, just as I do on all noms, whether they disclose or not :-)  I'm more worried that the students have a perspective; that rarely do noms get the level of support they're getting, so jbmurray might convey that info to them.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK.  Today I had a chat with the groups that are still hoping to go for FAC.  I'll try and say more later (in a minute I have to go to another class), but in brief I told them both that it would be a lot of work, and that the FAC process would certainly not be as plain sailing as it has been (relatively) so far for El Señor Presidente.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 21:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Oh, but I should also point out (should it not be clear!) that I'm as much of a newbie at FAC as any of them are.  Though I am trying to get involved a little now to figure out more or less how it works.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 21:52, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We're always desparate for reviewers, jbmurray, and we are very very happy to see you at FAC! Karanacs (talk) 17:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA team supports 

message: Just quickly, as I'm on the run to another meeting...
As I said above, I saw the project members (aka the class) again today.  It was in a fairly informal location, and this was our last meeting of the semester.  Games were played: Dictator novel charades; elect your dictator, for which I can report the people voted for The President.  Refreshments were supplied.
Anyhow, I also checked in with the various groups about whether or not they wanted to go for FAC.    They have been following this page, and are aware of the warnings about what's involved.  Moreover, I stressed that I was putting no pressure on them.  And I told them to think about it over the course of the day.  But it does look as though both Team Mario Vargas Llosa and Team Gabriel García Márquez want to give it a go for the gold star.  Not everyone from Team The General in His Labyrinth was present, so I'm not sure about them.  They would be the only ones to go for FAC.
I also said that I would be happy to stretch the deadline slightly: to Sunday night, i.e. the end of April 12.  They are aware that this is not a final deadline, of course, because even if they can make a nomination by then, there will still be work to do over subsequent days.
And as I've said above, I also spoke to Team Facundo.  In the same spirit, I also said I'd be prepared to stretch their deadline similarly to Sunday night if they want to renominate for WP:GAN.  And I will go over their sources with care either Friday or (more likely) Monday.  (And this, incidentally, regardless of whether or not they are able to achieve renomination.)
OK, now to my meeting.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 02:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure where to put this comment, and I can't speak for the rest of my group, but I want to keep working on the dictator novel after the deadline. My only problem is with exams coming up, I really shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a computer. My addiction to wikipedia is kind of a problem...As of April 25th, I want to try to get this article up to FA status. I haven't really been following the FA process that The President has been going through so I'd definitely appreciate any help. I think I might be addicted to Wiki for life.>_<--Abarratt (talk) 05:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, let's do it!  I'll also be slowing down on wikipedia once the big MMM push is over: I have other stuff to be doing.  But we can work on the article a little more slowly.  And perhaps it can be the residual article that the FA-Team might look upon fondly too from time to time?  ;)   It is the article that brings all the others together, so in some ways the linchpin.  (The anchor of a featured topic???)  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's great to hear from editors like Abarratt that they're becoming addicted!  That's our goal: we want to convert people from casual, occasional editors to editors who know how to take an article to FA, and there will definitely be support from the FA team for anyone who wants to take one of these twelve articles to featured level.  We all have other obligations too, so without the pressure of a deadline things are likely to slow down a bit, but I'm sure we can help the students reach FA on the articles they want to work on. Mike Christie (talk) 11:37, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry Carlaty and I, from Team The General in His Labyrinth, are extremely upset that we missed the dictator novel charades at yesterday's gathering! But on a more serious note, we are still trying to go for FA. If we can get it up for nomination at least by the deadline, we will right back at it on Friday and continue making improvements until FA status is confirmed. Eshiu (talk) 16:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, excellent!  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 17:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd suggest checking in with Yomangani, either at his talk page or at the TGIHL talk page; he's been following that article closely and is very experienced at FAC, and should be able to advise.  Mike Christie (talk) 17:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Quick Update

message: Congratulations everyone, El Señor Presidente is now officially a FA and whatsmore its going to the main page, Raul is even going to let Mfreud choose the date :) Acer (talk) 02:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very cool. El Señor Presidente meet Ima Hogg :-) So what is the next article up for FAC. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Mario Vargas Llosa! We definitely want to follow in El Señor Presidente's footsteps. See here. Lincolnchan98 (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations from me too! I think it would be great to have a biography FA as well as a novel and this one is nearly ready. Geometry guy 22:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  El Señor Presidente FA 

message: The editors here are putting in the work and Awadewit has left a series of suggestions on the talk page but the article could do with some extra pair of eyes for copyedit and whatnot. Also before you jump in please read the last two sections of the talk page, ie: Awadewits comments and regarding the restructuring the article is undergoing. The Major works section in particular, has been taken out while we try to integrate its contents into the other sctions.. any help is welcome Acer (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for help on Mario Vargas Llosa 

message: I thought it was time for another status, and with luck this will help editors on the FA team figure out where they can be useful to the MMM editors. Mike Christie (talk) 22:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *I just reviewed this article here and the students are working redrafting the article. Awadewit (talk) 04:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *I have created an FAC checklist here which we are going through. I have copy edited the article and left a list of comments on the article's talk page. I will try to shepherd the article and its editors through FAC in the next few days. However, if other people could weigh in on the fair use rationales, I would appreciate it. If other free images could be found, that would be wonderful. More copy editing eyes are always welcome. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 18:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *Repetition now (hopefully) addressed; I've reorganised the layout and rationalised the content. Still needs further copyediting though. EyeSerenetalk 20:01, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *I have renominated, making clear that the article previously failed for issues with sources, and suggesting no more than the standard 7-day period on hold.  The article still needs work, but there has been a lot of effort put into it.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 00:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  April 10 article status 

message: If we were to get three more feature articles, I think I might just retire.  The only way onward would be down.  :)  At least it would make Greogry Kohs happy.
(Wow, and I've just seen that Mfreud has intervened on Larry Sanger's blog!)  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 21:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: From that link, I think you'd all be best just shutting up shop at UBC and heading home. You're clearly finished as an academic institution. And Mfreud, you've done all of us proud, both on and off wiki (especially, I suspect, jbmurray!) :) EyeSerenetalk 22:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely!  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  You know what? 

message: I'm mainly going to be otherwise engaged for the rest of the day.  It looks like the boiler-room is really churning, especially at Mario Vargas Llosa, The General in his Labyrinth, and Facundo.
We've just had a call for reassurance at The General in his Labyrinth.  I think everything's going splendidly, but perhaps someone else can say that too?
Be back later.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:02, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Back briefly.  My goodness, it is AWESOME what's going on out there.  I am truly in awe!  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 00:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  otherwise engaged 

message: Hi everybody. With the deadline fast approaching (or arrived, it's 4:30 AM...), I'm requesting any input, help, suggestions, copyedits, MoS sweeps--anything you guys can can muster to help this article be ready for FAC. Acer and I have been doing our best to address all of Awadewit's points found on the MVLL talk page. There are still a few issues that need to be addressed, mainly an expansion of the Legacy section to include writers he has influenced. I'll do my best to get these done as soon as possible tomorrow. Thanks for all the help you guys have been! Lincolnchan98 (talk) 11:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Bump for [[Mario Vargas Llosa]]

message: I was looking at Gabriel García Márquez just now, wondering if it would be helpful to do a copyedit and make some notes for the editors, since this was one of the articles that the students said they wanted to take to FA.  Arantxa.rap has done some recent work, and there's been a little activity from FA team members, but there have been no major changes for a few days and the peer review doesn't have responses on it so I don't know if those points have been addressed.  I see some comments from Jbmurray to the effect that the article should really make use of the Dasso Saldivar source; I see there are a lot of references to Saldivar in the article now.  I'll do a copyedit, but I am more concerned about whether the content is there.  I don't have much of a literature background so I can't really assess this.  Any other opinions? Mike Christie (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *If the editors could respond to the peer review - mentioning what has been addressed - that would help a lot. Awadewit (talk) 18:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status check on Gabriel García Márquez 

message: Is at FAC. Yomanganitalk 08:15, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ''[[The General in His Labyrinth]]''

message: Mario Vargas Llosa is at FAC. A small dispute has erupted over the use of Spanish sources. *sigh* Awadewit (talk) 07:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ya I don't really understand what's going on. Should I say something? Lincolnchan98 (talk) 07:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lincolnchan98, you should feel free to intervene or not.  I think you might want to have a look over at the FAC debate for The General in His Labyrinth.  I think that Eshiu and Carlaty are doing a great job there.  Not getting too involved in anything over-controversial, but showing willingness to think about the comments and suggestions made.  That seems a good way of going about things.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

text: And as I've said, once I'm told what I have to translate, I will do so.  As, indeed, I did for El Señor Presidente.  But it's not yet clear what if anything needs translating.  Once there is some consensus on that, I will be the busy translator.  I have, incidentally, a published book-length translation to my name, not that it matters so much as I understand that the format is to include the Spanish too so that others can check on it.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: On the topic of FAC but not necessarily directly relevant here: don't feel that the aim of FAC is to convert every oppose to a support. The criteria and policies are interpreted differently by different people (and if the wording of those policies is the same as last time you nominated you are lucky indeed). If you find yourself doing major rewrites or restructuring to satisfy the one opposer among a number of supporters, consider that you may be changing the article from what the other reviewers are supporting. Some supports and opposes will be judged invalid on the merits of their arguments, some will just be wrong. Yomanganitalk 09:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The FAC director and his deputy (SandyGeorgia) are familiar with the policies and will disregard invalid opposes.  I don't think it is necessary to further debate the translation issue. Karanacs (talk) 13:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I really wouldn't bend over backward to appease Rima. He/she still seems to be holding a grudge over a misunderstanding with jbmurray days ago. Wrad (talk) 14:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And me. Awadewit (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lucky that Geogre isn't involved in this nom then (have a nose around, it's the most entertaining thing I've seen on WP for months) Yomanganitalk 15:42, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Yomangan for the pass through to Geogre's talk page. I so agree: super entertaining. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Mario Vargas Llosa]] 

message: Skomorokh, the GA reviewer at The Feast of the Goat, has indicated it still has real problems in his view for GA (see his talk page for a comment).  I am swamped at work and elsewhere; if anyone would like to take a look and see what they think needs doing that would be great.  Sorry I can't do more myself. Mike Christie (talk) 15:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you point us to the comment?  Maybe I'm missing something.  He did make some changes last night, but didn't comment.  The students are kind of under the impression that they've done what he suggested.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 16:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The comment is at User talk:Skomorokh#FotG query. To quote:
To be honest, it needs work. I extended to today (Monday) and it still does not meet GA standards; too much opinion is baldly stated as fact when it should be attributed and qualified; and the adaptations section is far from comprehensive. That said, the article has come on an awful lot in ten days. I will try to fix what I can.Skomorokh 01:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 16:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feast request 

message: OK, here's what's left.
First, the two at FAC seem to be doing OK on the whole, though your views are welcomed:
* Mario Vargas Llosa is at FAC.  Issues are being addressed.  I hope to get some translations done today.  
:*Still a couple of translation issues, but I won't be able to get back to the library this week; ideally student editors will be able to post original Spanish themselves.  My feeling is that we're going above and beyond on this particular issue, but so be it.  If I have time, I'll do a final copyedit, too.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 04:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: With my first final tomorrow and with little-to-no studying under my belt I've realized I don't have time to be checking my watchlist every 11 minutes. I'm completely lost on what the issues are about the Spanish/English translations and therefore haven't even been trying to follow that debate. Finding out more about La Nueva Novela is on my to-do list, but there's nothing in the current sources I have so I have to make a trip to the library sometime. Other than that, if there are any outstanding issues that need my attention, please ping me on my talk page. Lincolnchan98 (talk) 05:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No probs.  I think everything's more or less under control.  No worries.  Good luck tomorrow!  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Passed.  And it was better than I thought.  You'll see that I've been doing a progress report for each article here.  So far, Facundo is our second most-edited article.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 10:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *I'm working on this one, though really IMO it should be done already.  I may, however, be too close.  Another set of eyes might help.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 04:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *Have pinged the GA reviewer.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 10:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *Now GA. EyeSerenetalk 17:07, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *A little dodgier than I'd realized.  I've put some work into this including getting going on the synopsis.And I'm aware, incidentally, that when I add content I run the risk of adding Original Research, as I fall back on my so-called expertise.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 10:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *Perhaps Acer can take a look?  I don't think the students are going to do much more, if anything, so it should be either passed or failed now.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 19:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: *If someone else can copy edit Facundo, I can do the GA review. I am frankly exhausted with copy editing at the moment and I will have a stack of papers to grade come tomorrow. Awadewit (talk) 04:30, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: *I think there's end-of-semester exhaustion this end, too.  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 04:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Facundo looks interesting; in the next day or so, I'll give it a browse. (This does not constitute, for those chomping at the bit, a first-right-to-copyedit option. ;) –Outriggr § 05:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Outriggr! both Mike and I have copyedited this article to death, and a fresh pair of eyes would be most welcome... ;) EyeSerenetalk 08:01, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I didn't realize that—but Awadewit asked... When I looked yesterday, it did have an errant comma, so I'll fix that at least. :) –Outriggr § 22:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm still not really here.  ;)  --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 10:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Update, April 16

message: THANK YOU FA TEAM! (if you're unsure what I am referring to, see The General in His Labyrinth) Thanks to everyone for helping us out! We really appreciate it so much! I love that little bronze star so much! :-D Eshiu (talk) 21:29, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thank you!

message: I just want to give a huge shout out to all members of the FA team for all your work, help and mentoring for Mario Vargas Llosa. Couldn't have done it without you guys. Thanks :) Barnstar of Awesomeness for everyone!
 
Lincolnchan98 (talk) 01:06, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thanks from me