Talk:Dictator novel/Archive 1

TO DO

Please add your name to any of these tasks that you want to take on.--Abarratt (talk) 21:33, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Edit Introduction

~to be completed at a later date --Abarratt (talk) 02:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitely time to work on this!!--Abarratt (talk) 04:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit Historical Context

1. Dictators in Latin American History - everyone
2. Los Padres de la Patria - everyone

Edit Development of the Genre

Forerunners

• Facundo - Sebastian
• Amalia - Julie

Classic Dictator Novels

• The President - Amanda
• El Gran Burundún Burundá ha muerto
• King Ahab’s Feast -
• Reasons of State - Amanda
• I, the Supreme - Julie and Amanda
• The Autumn of the Patriarch - Sebastian
• The Lizard's Tail - Julie?
• The Perón Novel -
• The General and his Labyrinth - Sebastian
• The Feast of the Goat -

Others I think this is done for now...--Abarratt (talk) 04:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit Style and Themes

• New Techniques - Julie and Amanda
• Dictatorship
• Power
• Gender - Sebastian

AddPhotos

• dictators
• book covers
• writers

I really don't know how to do this...--Abarratt (talk) 04:16, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd say that for the moment at least you shouldn't worry too much about images. The text is much more important. We can always add images later. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

How do I...?

I'm thinking a lot of issues are going to come up since we're very new to wikipedia..
1) Make headings within headings? As an example, how could I make "introduction and history" as subsections of my "to do" heading on this page??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abarratt (talk • contribs) 23:13, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

See WP:HEAD. Also be sure to sign all your posts using four tildes ~~~~ so that we know who is talking. Wrad (talk) 23:41, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! --Abarratt (talk) 00:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

2) So I used [tool]to generate a citation but the book The Cambridge Companion to the Latin American Novel is not written by Efrain Kristal but edited by him/her. How do I change this? The chapter in question is written by John King.--Abarratt (talk) 04:04, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You'll have to edit the template as the page itself displays it somehow. Not really any easy way to do this. Wrad (talk) 04:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Or you can just precede the template with "John King, 'Chapter name', in ", after the <ref> tag and before the curly brackets for the cite template. There may be a way to do it with the cite book template too; I hope someone else can post a note on that.

There's another approach to references that you may find easier. Take a look at Offa of Mercia: there's a "References" section which contains all the "cite book" templates, including separate lines for each chapter cited (see Featherstone, cited in Brown & Farr, for an example). There's also a "Notes" section which is where the footnotes end up. This way the actual <ref> tags only have to contain an abbreviated version of the footnote, which makes it much quicker to type (and easier to read at the bottom of the page, too). For example, in your case you might use "<ref>John King, "Chapter", in Kristal, Efraín, ed., ''Cambridge Companion to the Latin American Novel'', pp. 59-80.</ref>". (Actually I broke a couple of minor style rules in that, but let's not worry about that just yet.) I find this approach easier as the footnotes aren't clogged up with the templates, which are hard to read. Mike Christie (talk) 04:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try some of this tomorrow!--Abarratt (talk) 04:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I was looking at this and getting very confused. Can we break the references into notes now to make this easier?--Abarratt (talk) 00:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I've done the straightforward book citations -- take a look. There's now a references section which lists three books. I used the cite book template for those -- I just took it straight from the ref tags that you'd put in. Then with those listed under references, I reduced the ref tags to just show the last name, book title, and page number. That makes the notes a lot easier to read. If you don't like this approach, then just revert to the version before I started editing. If you do, I suggest you move the other sources down into the references section, too -- use {{cite web}} or {{cite journal}} as needed -- and then you can simplify the other refs too. Any questions, just let me know. Mike Christie (talk) 23:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC

I like using the cite templates for now on the ref. page just because it's quick for me. I'm assuming I'll have to change it later?--Abarratt (talk) 02:57, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. It's good to be internally consistent, but that's something to worry about when you're close to being done; in the meantime do whatever makes it easier for you. When you're ready for peer review or GA I (or someone else) will be happy to do a pass and makes things consistent (in whichever direction we decide). Mike Christie (talk) 03:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd really appreciate if someone could please fix the Calderon reference. I have no idea what I am doing.. :(--Abarratt (talk) 04:08, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Def'n of Latin America

Just curious what everyone thinks should be included under Latin America. Should we be discussing Caribbean authors? --Abarratt (talk) 04:42, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm about to sign off for the evening, so won't be able to respond further tonight, but my immediate reaction is that it should correspond to whatever the scholarly sources you're using mean when they say "Latin American". No reason to vary from their definition, is there? Or do they not agree with each other? Mike Christie (talk) 04:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow fast response! I was specifically thinking about compiling a list of dictators, thinking in particular about François Duvalier and Jean Claude Duvalier in Haiti--Abarratt (talk) 04:47, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I doubt if a comprehensive list would be useful for the article, though that's just a personal opinion. I assume the reason to list some of them would be to establish in the reader's mind the prevalence of dictatorships at the time the genre began. Would a map be a sensible way to do this? A picture of south and central America with each country coloured according to the nature of the government? Mike Christie (talk) 12:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

There's no necessary reason to exclude the Caribbean, at least not the French Caribbean. But I agree that a comprehensive list would be unhelpful. Better, some general indication: some "exemplary" dictators. I'd add that a map wouldn't help much, except perhaps (perhaps) a map of, say, Latin America in 1974, the height of the dictatorships. But these regimes change relatively often, and it's important to note that these novels cover a vast historical range: from the early nineteenth century (Yo el Supremo) to the 1970s (The Perón Novel).

WikiProject Murder Madness and Mayhem and the FA-Team

To assist WikiProject Murder Madness and Mayhem in its drive to bring this article to Featured status, a number of experienced editors from the FA-Team have volunteered their editing services to the project. To see which editors are watching this article, click here.

You can contact a specific editor directly by leaving a message on their talk page, or more generally by posting a message here. To do this, click the '+' tab at the top of the page and enter a subject title, and your message, in the editing windows that will appear. Don't forget to finish off by typing four tildes (~~~~) to automatically add your signature; you need to be logged in for this to work properly.

We're all really enthusiastic about this project, and looking forward to working with you. All the best, The FA-Team 11:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced Material

"Postmodern Latina writers of the 1980s, such as Ana Castillo and Giannina Braschi challenge the structure of the dictator novel. For example, in Giannina Braschi's mock diary, "The Intimate Diary of Solitude" (published in Empire of Dreams), the narrator of the Latin American Boom is shot by a lonely make-up artist who works at Macy's and despises the commercialization of her solitude."

I'm hoping this can be expanded and sourced as it clearly adds to this article!--Abarratt (talk) 21:47, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

HELP!

Somehow while editing our references page seems to have disappeared but it's still there when we click 'edit'. What has happened???--Abarratt (talk) 18:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay I erased my citation and now it's back...what am I doing wrong here?--Abarratt (talk) 19:02, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it. You just forgot to put a slash in the ref. Wrad (talk) 19:04, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Wow, didn't realize something so small would cause such a huge change. Really freaked me out. :S Thanks for your help.--Abarratt (talk) 19:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Modernism

This section really needs some help. I'm trying to fill in this section with knowledge from a few books but it isn't enough to give this section justice. I'm hoping someone with more expertise can edit this section or provide some advice. Particularly, I'm not sure which authors to name as key representatives of the modernist novel in Latin America. These are the few that were previously on the page Rosario Castellanos, David Vinas, Antonio de Benedetto, Yolanda Oreamundo, Salvador Garendia, and Jacques Stephan Alexis, as well as established writers Agustín Yáñez, Juan Rulfo, and Leopoldo Marechal. --Abarratt (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

B-Class Article Status

Does anyone have advice on what we need to do to get this article up to B-Class status? ≈ Juliemcd (talk) 21:28, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd say it's not far to go, though I'll let someone from the FA-team speak up. But the article's still a little disjointed, and various sections could be fleshed out more. For instance, there should be a few lines about each of the classic dictator novels. In some instances, that material can be swiped from their relevant wikipedia pages (as you've done with El Señor Presidente. In some cases, you'll have to do some searching for yourself. The section on themes and style needs to be beefed up and referenced more, too. But your on your way. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 22:00, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I'm gonna make that call, and up this article to "B" class already. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 09:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Resources

I'm moving these articles from "Further Reading" to here. They should actually be cited in the article itself.

• Calviño Iglesias, Julio. La novela del dictador en Hispanoamérica, Madrid : Ediciones Cultura Hispánica, 1985.
• López-Calvo, Ignacio. "God and Trujillo": Literary and Cultural Representations of the Dominican Dictator, Gainesville, Florida: University Press of Florida, 2005.
• Monterroso, Augusto. "Novelas sobre dictatores".
• Rosario-Vélez, Jorge. "God and Trujillo": Literary and Cultural Representations of the Dominican Dictator (review) in The Americas - Volume 63, Number 4, April 2007, pp. 656-658
• Subercaseaux, B. 1976. «Tirano Banderas en la narrativa hispanoamericana: la novela del dictador, 1926-1976», in Hispamérica, 14, pp. 45-62.
• Zuluaga C. 1979. Novelas de dictador, dictadores de novela, Bogotá, C. Valencia.

--jbmurray (talk|contribs) 09:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Focus

Guys, there's still a problem with focus in this article. Too often it tries to cover the entirety of the Boom or even the entirety of Latin American literature. This is an article about the dictator novel, however, and it should references those things only in so far as they are relevant to the dictator novel. So I've cut the section on magical realism, because it didn't establish any links to the topic in hand. For what it's worth, and so you don't feel it's lost altogether, I'm putting it here. But honestly I don't see why this material should be in the article.

And don't be despondent about such a cut. Rather you should think "Hey, we don't have to do all that!" "All we have to do is focus on the dictator novel!"

If this doesn't make sense, just ask.

Meanwhile, over on I, the Supreme they've dug out a bunch of good sources directly on the dictator novel, most of which are online. I recommend you check them out!

OK, here's the cut section...

Magical Realism

The term magic realism was first used by the German art critic Franz Roh to refer to a painterly style also known as Neue Sachlichkeit.(Hart, p.1) However, in contrast to its use in literature, when used to describe visual art, the term refers to paintings that do not include anything fantastic or magical, but are rather extremely realistic and often mundane.Magical realism is an important feature of the Boom literature of the 1960s in Latin America. Magic realism (or magical realism) is an artistic genre in which magical elements or illogical scenarios appear in an otherwise realistic or even "normal" setting. Magical realism is often considered a subcategory of postmodern fiction due to its challenge to hegemony and its use of techniques similar to those of other postmodernist texts, such as the distortion of time. Many early magical realists such as Alejo Carpentier and Miguel Ángel Asturias studied with the surrealists, and surrealism, as an international movement, influenced many aspects of Latin American art. Surrealists, however, try to discover and portray that which is above or superior to the “real” through the use of techniques such as automatic writing, hypnosis, and dreaming. Magical realists, on the other hand, portray the real world itself as having marvelous aspects inherent in it. Many scholars have criticized the term 'magical realism' as it is a European term that is applied to non-European literature.(Ouyang, p14) Summed up well by Alfred J. Lopez, is this process of naming is "a futile European attempt to categorize and thus 'understand' it by this process of naming-which is already itself an act of appropriation, a bid to harness the wild, 'exotic' text within a reasonable European framework - to 'master' the other's difficult text?"(Ouyang, p15)

--jbmurray (talk|contribs) 06:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

And here's some more stuff I've cut. Again, you can always undo my edits. But I do think you need to focus, and to write about other stuff only in so far as it helps us understand the dictator novel.

Some scholars argue as to whether the Boom began in 1958 when Carlos Fuentes published La region más transparente (Where the Air is Clear), in 1962 with Mario Vargas Llosa winning the Biblioteca Breve Prize for his manuscript Los impostores ("The imposters"), in 1963 when Julio Cortázar published Rayuela (Hopscotch), or perhaps even as late as in 1967 when Gabriel García Márquez introduced Cien anos de soledad (One Hundred Years of Solitude) thus setting the stage for the recognition of magical realism.(King, p. 59)

The Spanish Civil War (1936 to 1939) had a significant influence on the Latin American Boom as it diminished the Spanish presence in Latin America. At this time the Latin American world was largely dependent on Spain for books and other literature from the rest of Europe, and the Civil War had essentially cut off that flow of reading material. Another contributing factor after the civil war in Spain, was World War II from the late 1930s to 1945, which consumed the rest of Europe and challenged many long-standing notions and ideas throughout the western world. The Boom began as Latin America became a producer of essays, poetry, and novels linked to many Latin American countries' introspection of themselves as they attempted to define their own identities on the national and continental level.(Dey, p. 13)

--jbmurray (talk|contribs) 06:28, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I understand why you did this but to be honest it's really discouraging to see the page shrink. Hopefully our group can come together and discuss our article a bit more because I feel a bit lost now.--Abarratt (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I can see why you might be discouraged. And if you want, your group should feel free to come and talk to me. But I do think you should take it as a positive move: you don't in fact have such a big task to undertake! You are writing about a small corner of Latin American literature, not the whole thing. But again, you guys should feel free to come talk to me. You've made a lot of progress already, and shouldn't feel down! Really, there's not too much more content to add. This is an important page, but it needn't necessarily be a long one. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 15:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Definitions

I just wanted to thank the editors for their useful contributions to this article! Writing an article on a genre is very difficult - their desire to undertake that challenge should be commended. That said, let me offer some advice. When defining and explaining a genre, it is best to do so through abstraction and generality rather than through particular examples. For example, if I wanted to define the "science fiction novel", I could list Philip K. Dick, Ursula LeGuin, Arthur C. Clarke, etc. but the works of these writers are different in a lot of ways. The question the article on the science fiction novel would need to answer is: How are their science fiction novels the same? That is what this article needs to answer about the "dictator novel". What are the characteristics of a dictator novel? I think that by expanding the "Style and themes" section and thinking about the "what are the characteristics of a dictator novel" question while doing research, it will be easier to write this page. Of course, not all scholars are going to agree on the definition, but that is fine - you can present competing definitions here (see WP:NPOV). For someone unfamiliar with the "dictator novel", a list of novels is less helpful than a general description. The list gives them a place to go after they have absorbed the general definition. I hope that this was helpful! Awadewit (talk) 17:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

That is actually helpful! It's a very good way for us and try to focus our article, and we'll definitely keep it in mind. Thanks! Juliemcd (talk) 08:57, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Another dictator novel???

Should we include Cortázar's Libro de Manuel?--Abarratt (talk) 22:59, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've never read it, so don't know. But I think that the advice above that you look to define further the general characteristics of the genre is good. You actually have a decent list of novels now, and a fair amount of information on each. I wouldn't be too worried that you're missing any --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:05, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Some of the sources I've found broaden the definition of a dictator novel. I added them in the definition but haven't expanded in the classic dictator novel section. Hopefully this is okay. I'm hoping to add another definition to round this out.--Abarratt (talk) 00:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Novels of Exile

According to Raymond Leslie Williams, novels of exile are separate from the dictator novel because they "produced a critique othat the writers could not have published in their homelands". (168) Accordingly, I'm moving Tomás Eloy Martínez's La novela de Perón into others. I'm not sure about what the Martin source says about this, therefore, please change this back if deemed appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abarratt (talk • contribs) 14:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I haven't read the Williams book, but I can't quite understand it. A bunch of dictator novels are written in exile: both The President and I, the Supreme, for instance. But nobody would describe these as anything but dictator novels. And I'm not even sure that Eloy Martínez's book was written in exile: it was certainly written long after Perón had already died. You might want to go back to the Williams text and try to clarify what it's actually saying. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll bring it to class today..maybe you can take a look. He does specifically say that exile novels were a counterpart to the dictator novel so maybe what i wrote should be reworded? --24.87.91.44 (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing the book in. I don't think Williams is all that clear, frankly! But I think that rather than differentiating dictator novels and novels of exile, his point is that they are similar. For what it's worth, I'd say that the difficulty is that they are two different types of definition that he's mixing up. But anyhow, they are clearly overlapping. To cut to the chase: probably the best way of dealing with the issue is simply (and briefly, because literature of exile is not your topic) to observe that some of these novels are also sometimes considered under the slightly different heading of "literature of exile."

Put it this way: genres (like "dictator novel") are only one way of categorizing literature; others, for instance, might include territorial ("Canadian fiction"), historical ("nineteenth-century fiction"), or in terms of the author ("women's fiction"). Sometimes these different categories may have nothing to do with each other. At other times, there are significant and meaningful overlaps (the eighteenth-century is also the period of the rise of the novel; Icelandic fiction is heavy with Sagas; etc.). There's obviously, in this sense, an affinity between dictator novels and novels of exile: the one category is a counterpart to the other. Not that you need to put this in the article. Just so (I hope) it's clear in your head. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 09:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Lead

If the Lead is expanded, this article probably will be advanced enough to be considered for a GA nom. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 01:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! I'll do that tonight. Thanks!--Abarratt (talk) 04:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

GAN?

Is this article ready to go to the next stage? I know we still need to work on style and themes but the lead looks decent and thanks to Jbmurray we have some photos! Thank you! --Abarratt (talk) 15:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It still has work to do but it is GAN ready except for a couple of {{fact}} tags:

• In addition, to these narrative techniques, a new world view was inserted into their texts in which time and space become flexible qualities in a chaotic, fragmented modern world.

• Dictator novels produced during the Boom era by writers such as Alejo Carpentier pioneered what came to be known as magical realism.

Under the GA criteria, an article can be 'quick-failed' without a review if these tags are present. Resolve the missing info, and it is good enough for GA. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 15:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I removed them! Thanks for rearranging the article. Looks much better!--Abarratt (talk) 16:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've just nominated it. NB that there is still some work to do. One detail for instance is some confusion about some of the Brotherston references. But a GA Review will also point us in the right direction. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 17:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Under GA review

I have taken on Dictator novel for review under the Good Article criteria, as nominated on the Good article candidates page by jbmurray. You'll be pleased to hear that the article meets none of the quick-fail criteria, so I will shortly be conducting an in-depth review and will post the results below.

Where an article is not an outright pass, but requires relatively minor additional work to be brought up to GA standard, I will normally place it on hold - meaning that editors have around a week to address any issues raised. As a precaution to prevent failure by default should this occur, if editors are likely to be unavailable over the next ten days or so, feel free to leave a message on my talk page so we can arrange a more convenient time for review. Regards, EyeSerene^talk 14:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

On hold

I have now reviewed this article under the six Good article criteria, and have commented in detail on each criterion below:

1 Well written (FAIL)

Although the prose is generally good, flows well and is pleasant to read, there are areas that would benefit from additional work (and naturally the MoS must be appeased!).

Manual of Style:

• Lead: this needs expanding to come 'into synch' with the rest of the article. For example, the 'Legacy' and 'Not quite dictator novels' sections are unmentioned, and although caudillismo is described in the lead, I could find no reference to it in the article body. As a guideline, the lead should be a summary of, rather than an introduction to, the article (more information at WP:LEAD).

• Naming: sometimes "dictator novel" is italicised, sometimes capitalised, sometimes not. This should be consistent (and I would say not italicised, as it's not really a title). Done

Made it so that "dictator novel" is always lower case and not italicised. Juliemcd (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• In-line citations: these should follow directly after punctuation with no intervening spaces.^{like this!} Errors are mainly in the "Style and Theme" section, but I did spot some others... Done

I think I've caught and fixed all of these now. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Headings: decapitalise "Theme" in "Style and Theme" (per WP:HEAD). I'm also not sure about "'Not quite' dictator novels" as a heading, but I think I can live with it if we can't come up with anything more encyclopedic ;) Done

Fixed. I quite like the "not quite" heading. Rather creative! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

It does say what it means ;) I'll waive that comment. EyeSerene^talk 09:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Layout: Perhaps the "Literary context" section should directly follow the lead, above the "Definition" section. This would help set the context for what follows (and also explain the "Boom", which otherwise appears at the start of "Definition" without explanation). Done

Fixed. "Literary context" is now directly after the lead. Juliemcd (talk) 00:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Wikilinks: wikilinking words or phrases if they are inside a direct quotation is discouraged (a few examples of this in "Classic dictator novels"). Done

Fixed. I believe I caught all of them. Juliemcd (talk) 00:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Prose:

• Lead, para 1: would it be possible to reword a little to remove the second two pairs of brackets? Done

• Lead, para 1: "...a political-military leader at the head of an authoritarian power" Perhaps 'regime' instead of 'power'? Done

Fixed. Changed 'power' for 'regime'. Juliemcd (talk) 01:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Lead, para 2: this seems to contradict itself by first stating that the goal of the genre is not to focus on the figures themselves, then gives examples to the contrary. Done

Reworded that paragraph, I hope that it's more clear now. Juliemcd (talk) 02:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Much clearer! EyeSerene^talk 09:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Definition, para 1: "Other literary treatments of the dictator followed..." It's not totally clear from the context whether this refers to the specific dictator in The President (ie Cabrera) or the general "dictator" figure. Done

Fixed. It was referring to the figure, clarified this. Juliemcd (talk) 04:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Definition, para 1: Why should people being "on the move" make the genre less attractive?

• Definition, para 2: "...offer us a more intimate view of their subject" Maybe "...offer the reader..."? Done

Fixed. Changed "us" to "the reader" Juliemcd (talk) 04:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Definition, para 2 (next sentence): don't start a sentence with 'And' ;) Done

Fixed. Got rid of the "and", and hopefully started the sentence properly. :) Juliemcd (talk) 04:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Definition, para 2: Jorge Zalamea's book title is given in both English and Spanish - stick with one or the other. Done

Fixed. I chose to go with Spanish as the rest of the novels mentioned in the section were in Spanish as well. Juliemcd (talk) 04:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Overall in the article as a whole, the confusion remained. I've gone through making the main title used English, when there is a published translation. Where, as in fact in the case of Zalea's book, I can't find a published translation, so I've stuck to the Spanish (with a translation provided, but in quotation marks rather than italicized, in the relevant place). --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I think English is preferred where possible, being the English Wikipeidia 'n all EyeSerene^talk 09:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Definition, para 3: I think the last two sentences are a little awkward; they come across as repetitive and dictating (pun intended) to the reader. Maybe they could be reworded or combined somehow? Done

Reworded it to read: "Novels such as Julio Cortázar's Libro de Manuel (1973) and Alejandra Pizarnik's La condesa sangrienta (1976) that contain political themes, but do not centre on the rule of a particular dictator or authoritarian figure cannot be classified as dictator novels." I hope that's better. Juliemcd (talk) 04:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Again, much improved! EyeSerene^talk 09:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Style and theme: the lead says "one of the hallmarks is writing and power", but this section says "power"... Done

Fixed by adding writing to theme section and mentioning dictatorship theme in lead--Abarratt (talk) 20:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Style and theme: Power is given as the "main" theme - this implies there are other lesser themes, which are not described. Maybe it just needs to be reworded? eg "The common theme of dictator novels is power." Done

I think I fixed this..but not sure what theme should be considered most important and need to review sources so I'm not crossing it off yet--Abarratt (talk) 17:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Reviewed Moses source and hopefully this looks better now! Changed it to "a predominant theme" and made the other themes stand out--Abarratt (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

That's definitely an improvement. Could we clarify the opening of the second paragraph further? Who claims that there is a strong link between dictatorship, writing and power, and why? Presumably your justification for saying this is the subsequent (Moses) quotation, in which case we really should mention who Moses is (something like "According to literary critic Michael Valdez Moses in his 2002 review of Feast of the goat, ...") EyeSerene^talk 17:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Style and theme, para 2: a couple of examples of unencylopedic writing ("Of course claiming egalitarianism..."; "one cannot deny the connection...") that need rewording. Done

Reworded to make it more neutral. Juliemcd (talk) 01:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Dictators in Latin American history, para 1: editorialising ("Since independence (and arguably earlier), Latin American countries have been subject to more than their fair share of both right and left-wing authoritarian regimes...") Done

Removed editorializing statements in this section--Abarratt (talk) 21:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• DILH, para 1: "...which previously forbid his reelection." Forbade? Done

Someone changed this to prevented

• DILH, para 2: It's interesting to mention US interference, but is this a factor in the "dictator novel"? If not, perhaps it's not really relevant and should be removed; if so, can we get more detail on it?

I added a bit about this in both the DILH section and the themes section. It would be good to have another source for what has been said in DILH so I'd say this isn't complete yet.--Abarratt (talk) 21:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Your expansion has helped. The only niggle I have now is that there's a danger of becoming repetitive by covering the same information in two adjacent sections. I think we're OK so far, but we'll see how it pans out when you've finished with the content. EyeSerene^talk 17:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Los Padres de la Patria: the quote says "comparable book". Comparable to what? Done

placed into context--Abarratt (talk) 20:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

That makes a big difference! EyeSerene^talk 17:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• Forerunners: the first paragraph needs copyediting for grammar and punctuation. Done

Edited this to improve the flow, shorten some long-winded parts, and clarified whether it was Facundo the character or novel being discussed in each instance. I didn't realize before that we weren't striking things off ourselves. Will wait until EyeSerene looks over the editing.--Abarratt (talk) 05:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries ;) You've massively improved this section, btw! EyeSerene^talk 17:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

• 'Not quite' dictator novels, para 3: this paragraph is rather short to be adrift on its own, and I'm not convinced of its relevance to the rest of the article. It also needs citing (who says those other novels are "influential for or reminiscent of the genre"?) However, I do believe it's a nice addition, so if it could be worked into the article elsewhere...

Added a bit to make this work with the rest of the article but it could be moved to definition since Alvarez is mentioned there...I kind of like it here as it highlights other themes and brings in a few more novels. Still need a citation for the last paragraph. I think this was added by Jbmurray--Abarratt (talk) 00:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps moving it to Definition would be a good idea if it can be worked into the text there; stylistically, short (one- or two-sentence) paragraphs are discouraged. However, I'll leave this decision up to you. For GA, as long as we get that cite, I'll be happy to sign off on this bit. EyeSerene^talk 07:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

2 Factual accuracy (FAIL)

• DILH, para 1: "Despite intense criticisms leveled at these dictators, they leave behind a legacy of development." This is a rather surprising statement on the face of it, and should be explicitly cited to support itself.

I'm not sure how to tackle this. In terms of a legacy of development, are we talking about the goals of some nationalist leaders who wanted to focus on industrial development or maybe about laws/policies that improved life for the middle-class? Also why is this significant to this article?--Abarratt (talk) 18:58, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Obviously I can't really answer that, but I read elsewhere that they often had a minimal programme of reforms and development to ensure popular support, and I'm sure ego was also involved in a wish to leave a legacy. Perhaps it would help to reword this part or remove it if it can't be sourced? EyeSerene^talk 19:10, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I'll leave this up to Julie to decide if it should be kept. I can support that some nationalist leaders looked to industrial reform to develop their countries. For example, in a 2001 article by John Chasteen, he makes particular reference to this, but not specifically to particular dictators. On the other hand, he does specifically mention reforms by José Batlle y Ordóñez of Uruguay and leaders during the Mexican revolution...Again, I'm still unsure about this..

To be honest, if no-one comes up with anything else and you want to retain this statement, I think what you've written above makes a pretty good blueprint and could perhaps be written into the article to replace that sentence. I'll wait to see how consensus goes ;) EyeSerene^talk 07:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Classic dictator novels: Mario Vargas Llosa is unreferenced at present. Done

Added Moses reference, probably needs another to cite the last sentence.--Abarratt (talk) 17:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

This is now also reference by Niessa, taken from The Feast of the Goat page--Abarratt (talk) 19:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• 'Not quite' dictator novels, para 3: citation needed (see above)

Added a few references..one still needed for the last paragraph

• There seems to be some page information missing from some of the cites (23, 32, 33, 55 as of review date). Done

Removed Gray Diaz reference for now and others now have page numbers--Abarratt (talk) 20:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Citation 39 (Swanson) is broken. Done

• Citation 48 (Claude Fell): "ibid" mixes very badly with Wikipedia, as the order of cites can change. Give the page number, or repeat the reference using <ref name=.... />. Done

This reference is causing so much hassle, maybe we should just delete it rather than trying to find it..--Abarratt (talk) 14:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That is sometimes easier in the long run! If you do, just be sure to remove or re-source anything that relies on this ref. EyeSerene^talk 17:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay I just removed it and will add a bit more about I, the Supreme from another source I just found so I think this is fixed :D--Abarratt (talk) 20:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Added to I, the Supreme from its own page and from Boyers reference, so I hope this looks good now--Abarratt (talk) 22:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

3 Coverage (PASS)

The article provides sufficient coverage of its subject. Admittedly I'm no expert, but I did feel that I came away with a good understanding of the "dictator novel" genre.

4 Neutrality (WEAK PASS PASS)

The article is suitably neutral in its tone (or will be, once the editorialising mentioned above has been dealt with!)  Done

5 Stability (PASS)

Although the article is being (and has been) extensively worked on, this is constructive development and does not constitute instability under the criteria.

6 Images (FAIL PASS)

None of the three book covers have suitable Fair-use rationales for use in this article. In itself, that's easily fixed, but what's more problematic is whether we can justify their use here. I suspect they may have to go (I'll get a second opinion though). Done

I really have no idea how to fix this problem as I've never added a photo before. What can I do here?--Abarratt (talk) 14:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I've now obtained a second opinion from Elcobbola, who is a regular FA reviewer and very knowledgeable about image copyrights. Unfortunately it seems that my instinct was correct. He writes:

...even with complete rationales, the book covers would likely not qualify for fair use in this article. The images appear to be used as “eye candy”; I’m unable to discern or anticipate meaningful contributions beyond this malapropos function. I’m forced to wonder how seeing, for example, the cover of El Señor Presidente helps me to understand either that it was a classic novel in this genre or the genre itself. Fulfilling either of those purposes would be necessary to satisfy WP:NFCC#8. Other (perhaps now moot) considerations include the apparent ability of prose alone to convey meaning (which would be more so pertinent if this were up for FA) and the questionable necessity of all three covers; NFCC#3A requires as little use as possible in each article.

I'm afraid the upshot of this is that we need to remove all three book cover images from the article. Although it's a shame, it does mean we don't need to worry about the Fair-Use rationales on them... EyeSerene^talk 16:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Just removed the three book cover images. Juliemcd (talk) 00:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sad isn't it?  :( --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 00:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it does look more barren now... Juliemcd (talk) 02:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It is a pity, but images are not required for GA. If they are used though, I'm sure you understand why we have to be fairly strict about their copyright status :P EyeSerene^talk 07:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the opportunity to review such an interesting and well-researched article. You can all be very proud of the work you have put in so far! As a result of the above concerns I have placed the article on hold. This gives editors up to a week to address the issues raised (although in some circumstances the hold period can be briefly extended). I'll regularly check back here, but please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or are ready for a re-review. All the best, EyeSerene^talk 18:15, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Outstanding issues preventing GA promotion

To relieve some of the potential for confusion when going through the above section, I've relisted the issues that are still waiting to be addressed below.

• Lead: this still needs expanding to fully summarise the article, with no section left unmentioned. I'll have a go at this if I get some time later, but feel free to jump in ;) Done

I've re-ordered and expanded the lead slightly to cover the entire article, but it needs proofreading. I've also hit a bit of a wall with the final sentence, where I tried to work in the 'not-quite' and 'foreign' novels, so if someone can improve on my prose... EyeSerene^talk 20:01, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That looks great! Thanks. Will reread this in a bit, but I think your version looks great.--Abarratt (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You already mentioned at the beginning of the para that: dictator novels have been extremely influential in the development of a Latin American literary tradition. So I don't think its necessary to say that other LA authors were influenced by it.. What do you think of the way it looks now? Feel free to modify Acer (talk) 20:26, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That's much better, thank you! I'll mark this off as done now. EyeSerene^talk 22:48, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• Definition, para 1: The notion that because people were "on the move" in the 50s and 60s, the genre became less attractive, still needs an explantion. Done

I just deleted this bit and helped improve the flow to the next paragraph.--Abarratt (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Problem solved! EyeSerene^talk 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• DILH, para 2: Is there more to come on the role of US interference? Abarratt thought there may be more to do (specifically, sourcing to add). Done

Is it okay the way it is? I don't think I'll have time to add more here before tomorrow.--24.87.91.44 (talk) 04:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it's fine - I was only really waiting for your confirmation (as the subject experts). I'll mark this off then. EyeSerene^talk 08:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

• 'Not quite' dictator novels, para 3: this is still missing a cite (we need something where a commentator makes the link between these novels and the dictator novel genre). It's also awaiting a decision as to its place in the article (though this isn't particularly important for my GA assessment).

jbmurray has agreed to help us out here... EyeSerene^talk 20:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

As per this page, it looks like there are some sources that can link Midnight's Children with Magical Realism that is most commonly associated with Latin America..this is all I have found so far.--Abarratt (talk) 05:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I was going to try and show that this link makes these novels valid as off-shoots of the genre, but after more thought, I realized then any novel using m.r. would apply and that simply makes no sense. Also MR is not a prerequisite for the genre so again this doesn't work. I just removed it since I can't find a source right now. Not sure if that effects the intro making it look incomplete?--Abarratt (talk) 06:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. I put that there, and to be honest, it could be just me.  :) I.e. what around here they call "original research." Damn fine original research, mind you... At some point I'll try to find someone else who agrees with me (on this as on so much more), but yes for now deleting it is much simpler. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Tut. These academics can't help themselves. I'm sure you're right though - maybe you should write a paper, then we could cite it ;) Problem solved though. EyeSerene^talk 17:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

*DILH, para 1: the status of the "legacy" statement is still undecided. It either needs supporting as it stands, or rewording less dogmatically per Abarratt's comment above (and still sourcing, naturally!). Done

This has been expanded and sourced. How does it look now? If it's not really that relevant we can just delete it. I didn't research it that much.--Abarratt (talk) 20:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Happy with this now, good work! I worked one of the quotations into the prose to avoid some serial quotes. It would be nice to link Pessoa, but I can't seem to find an article on him (at least, none of the results seem to match up to a Brazilian President). This is not an issue for this review though. EyeSerene^talk 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Being a brazilian I should know our presidents :P I believe this is the one you're looking for Epitácio Lindolfo da Silva Pessoa, he took office in 1919 to complete the presidential term that ranged from 1918 to 1922. hope it help Acer (talk) 23:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent! I did look at this article and thought it was the most likely candidate, but with only his surname to go on I wasn't 100%. EyeSerene^talk 08:01, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope this helps to focus our efforts for the last few hurdles. You've all done a superb job over the last few days dealing with my review, and I look forward to being able to pass this article soon ;) All the best, EyeSerene^talk 13:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

There's also the matter of the Donoso reference. Does anyone know the exact details? I could guess since I found one book out from UBC lib. that matches it pretty well but I don't want to guess!--Abarratt (talk) 00:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Got it! The reference is all cleaned up now. Juliemcd (talk) 05:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I had noticed this. There is a little leeway at GA (if not FA) for incomplete references and citations, so I hadn't raised it as an issue affecting the assessment. It's nice to have it fixed though! EyeSerene^talk 08:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Final points before assessment

I've checked the article through one last time, done a bit of copyediting and MoS stuff, and (as always happens) spotted a couple of things for you to check:

• I moved the long quote from González Echevarria into a blockquote, but I'm a little confused by the square brackets round Patiño. Should they be there? Done

This quote was actually copy-pasted from I, the Supreme and I gather that Patiño's name is not explicitly mentioned but he is what is being referred to. Is there a better way to do this?--Abarratt (talk) 19:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

In my writing experience this is a standard way to represent this situation, so I think this is OK. Mike Christie (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought that might be it, but in the context of the quote it looks odd. To clarify, without it there, that bit would say "...his abuse of _ his constant worry...". It looks like there's either some original text missing (in which case we also need an ellipsis), or the square brackets should be extended to "...his abuse [of Patiño,] his constant worry...". Does that make it clearer? EyeSerene^talk 20:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I changed this to exactly what it says. I see now why it was reworded..sounds kinda funny.--Abarratt (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I do think that's much better the way you have it now though. I really appreciate your being so patient with my endless picking at the article! EyeSerene^talk 20:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

• Style and theme: "In order to avoid the risks of reinforcing simplistic stereotypes about machismo and the supposedly unique form that it takes on in Latin American, it should be noted that egalitarianism, while operating within a largely masculinist framework, is not limited to Latin America alone." This sentence is not especially relevant to the subject, and comes over as lecturing the reader. I think it might be best removed, but it's your call ;) Done

EyeSerene, is this a blocker for GA? Sounds like it's not, but I wasn't sure from your phrasing. Mike Christie (talk) 19:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I removed it from the section because you're right, it's not really that relevant.--Abarratt (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it would have been difficult to reword and make relevant. Thanks! EyeSerene^talk 20:03, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

• Classic dictator novels: I heavily edited one sentence in the I, the Supreme section, as it read like a book review. If you could read it through to make sure I haven't altered the sense... Done

Looks good. Again, I mostly took this from the I, the Supreme page. Sounds better. Thanks :D

Sorry to bring these up, but we're so close now... EyeSerene^talk 18:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Pass

Congratulations on your fantastic work on the suggestions provided. It's been a pleasure to review this fascinating article, and I am now satisfied that Dictator novel meets the GA criteria. I have therefore passed it as a Good Article, and listed it on the Good Articles page under the category Language and literature.

For futher improvement in future, the number of direct quotations in the "Classic dictator novels" section could be reduced by rewriting them as prose, and the legacy section could be expanded to mention the awards given to dictator novel authors.

Excellent work, and thank you to all Dictator novel's editors for your valuable contributions to Wikipedia! EyeSerene^talk 21:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)