Jump to content

User talk:LordViD

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Spangineer (talk | contribs) at 19:46, 26 February 2006 (Che Guevara: recent changes). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive #1

Che Guevara

Hello LordViD. Having worked on the Che Guevara article since its inception, I am very appreciative of all of the work you have put into it today to bring it up to FAC-candidacy level. The only modification that you made that troubles me is how you merged the section labelled "The Intellectual and Artistic" into the section "Youth". I do not think that this merger works at all because the article has been written in chronological order throughout, and the chronology is disrupted by the references in the "Youth" section to how he returned to playing chess in Cuba and the role his photographs played in the Bolivian guerrilla campaign. I do agree that the The Intellectual and Artistic" section as it existed prior to your merging it was a big problem for the article -- just last night I spent many minutes staring at it and wondering what could be done to either re-work or remove it because it seemed to me to be the weakest part of the article. Even if we were to add more content to it, which would not be too difficult, I think that it was, and would continue to be, out of place at the end of the article. The only possibility that I have been able to come up with is to leave the information about his beginning to play chess and his taking up photography in the "Youth" section but remove from that section the references to his playing chess in Cuba and the photographs in Bolivia. Those topics could either be mentioned in the "Cuba" and "Capture and Execution" sections respectively, or converted into Content Notes.

I look forward to hearing your ideas about this ... Polaris999 03:11, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • You are, of course, completely right, since you are the one who has written the article, not I. I have read your idea and it seems like the best way to go; Let's leave the information about his beginning to play chess and his taking up photography in the "Youth" section, add the reference about him playing chess in Cuba and the pictures in Bolivia. Thanks.LordViD 05:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have now implemented your idea. Check it out and let me know what you think. LordViD 05:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thank you for your reply, LordVid. Will you do this, or shall I? (My preference is you, since you bring a fresh perspective to the article.)
        • BTW I have just noticed a problem with a source concerning the "dispute" over CG's birthdate. The spelling looked wrong to me, so I corrected it, but then decided to take a look at where the link leads ... and was surprised to discover that it leads to an older version of our very own wiki CG article! I don't think that we can cite ourselves, so this needs to be changed ASAP. We already have a good link to a source for that, probably in the Content Notes (as I recall). Anyway, I can re-do the source note #3 to link to an acceptable source and will get to work on that just as soon as I finish a source note that I am now preparing for the Sartre comment in the Legacy section... Polaris999 05:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • LordVid, I was trying to post my answer to you just as you were writing to me [so I got "edit conflict" message several times] to say that you had taken care of the merged sections. Thank you!! I will go back to the CG page now to see your new version ... Polaris999 05:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Masterful! You definitely found the perfect place to insert that sentence re the photos. And I guess that the matter of the chess games in Cuba has been relegated to the source note? Seems fine to me. Again, many thanks.
              • Meanwhile, I have just discovered another matter that requires our prompt attention: some of the source notes are out of order (off by one). This problem affects at least all source notes after number [40] -- I haven't yet tried to trace it back to see how far it goes or what has caused this malfunction. I will start working on that as soon as I finish adding the two source notes I have "in the pipeline" right now. Polaris999 06:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                • I just found the info re chess at the end of the Cuba section. I moved it up a few paragraphs, please take a look and see how you like it in that location ... (It just didn't seem quite right to me to have it sandwiched between launching ballistic missiles and delivering a speech at the UN, but I may be wrong about this ...) Polaris999 06:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I actually thought the source given for the birthdate was lifted from that website, not the opposite. As for the chess comments, the place you put it in is perfect. I will also be looking into the source note malfunction. Thanks. LordViD 06:38, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Glad we have found satisfactory "new homes" for chess and photos -- actually, I think that where we have them now is a notable improvement over the "stub" sub-section that previously housed them.
                      • Source Notes seems to be working fine now. I am going through them one by one, just to make sure. At present, have reached [43] and it is all right, so perhaps what I experienced was just a transitory problem. Maybe two people were editing at about the same time and this caused some perturbation ... Polaris999 06:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                        • Yes, the source note seem to be working fine with me also. That's most of the problems fixed right? The external links still need to be shortened and trimmed though. LordViD 06:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                          • Yes, the external links section seems to be the most important remaining task. To start, would you agree that we could remove links to websites that are already included in the Source Notes section? Polaris999 07:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                            • Yes, I was actually going to ask you the same thing. Removing External links already in the source notes is a good idea. LordViD 07:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
                              • Very good -- I will take out the couple I am aware of right now. Incidentally, there are a few editors who like to add their favorite links to each possible reference and/or links sub-section of the CG article, apparently with the intention of increasing their exposure, and even though others of us try to remove duplicates, it isn't always possible for us to keep up with them ... Polaris999 07:40, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have done many changes since last time, hopefully for the better. Look at them and tell me if you object to any;
  1. I have split the lead section into paragraphs
  2. I have shortened the external links. I removed some of them and changed some to source notes. I have also made one inline in the first sentence under the "Disappearance from Cuba" heading (the audio one)
  3. I have reduced the size of the references and and the external links sections.

Finally, what do you say about adding Image:Ergstimecover1960.jpg to the article. If so, where shall we place it? LordViD 13:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganization

I'm glad you like the reorg; hopefully there won't be a problem with the "cultural impact" section; sometimes people like to see prose rather than a list. In my opinion though it's fine as is. I also just added a few sentences to the lead about Guevara's early life; hopefully it provides useful context and helps address mav's objection. Feel free to play around with it. Oh, and I think I agree with you on citing Guevara's book; it's already in the references so it should be fine. Oh, one more thing—while I appreciate the compliment on my editing skills, you're the one who deserves praise for doing great work on this article and turning it into a strong FAC candidate. Nice job! --Spangineer (háblame) 19:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]