Talk:Domingo Faustino Sarmiento/Archive 1

First comment

I do not consider that this page is impartial. The article contains only the official version of events. Not once does the article take in consideration what the new historians, and previous revisionist historians say about Sarmiento's life and actions.

The article does not mention the facts that: Sarmiento was a very unpopular president. Sarmiento ordered to do a massive killing of the gaucho class, black race, and native people for considering them 'unfit to be part of the Argentina that he wanted to create' Sarmiento often lied in his public speeches, to back his actions, even if he had no fundaments.

Nobody is denying that he founded many schools, but the above facts are true, are also documented and hae been proven, and are not mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucasliso (talk • contribs)

The so called “revisionist” version, is a not only biased but also militant version, despite being in certain ways the current official version.

Criticism against Sarmiento is welcome in the article, but not in the shape of pseudo historical points of view.

It’s not a fact that “Sarmiento was a very unpopular president”, that’s, besides false, a POV. It’s also false that he ordered any “massive killing”. His works do have many contradictory statements, but his “Conflicto y armonías de las razas en América” shows that he was not any kind of racist.

The paragraph that one user has been trying to impose by repetition ad nauseam said that Sarmiento was “harsh towards the lower class of Argentina”, which is very strange considering that he belonged to a “low class”, he was never rich and didn’t leave any fortune. He fought against poverty and his educational politics targeted the “lower class”, since he focused on public free basic education.

But the most bizarre statement in that paragraph is: “He would use every resource that was in his reach to exterminate them (i.e. the gauchos), often accusing them with false charges and then executing them.” Please mention a gaucho that was “accused with a false charge” and then executed by Sarmiento. And demonstrate that the adverb “often” also applies. --Filius Rosadis 13:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

It is true that Sarmiento's view of the Gaucho was far from positive. The original quote seams to be either "Hay que regar el suelo argentino con sangre de gaucho, que es lo único humano que tienen" ("We need to water the Pampas with Gauchos' blood, that's the only human thing they have") or "No economice sangre de gaucho que para lo único que sirve es para regar la tierra" ("Don't spare Gaucho blood, for all it's worthy for is watering the soil"). In spite of this, some historians claim he wrote that in a letter while furious, and that he referref to the Gauchos of a certain region. Nevertheless, it is clear that Sarmiento's ideas of Europeization didn't care much about the gaucho. Mariano(t/c) 13:59, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Sarmiento was quite a choleric character, that’s why he was contradictory so many times. But (1) gauchos is not the same as “lower class”; and (2) he did care about the gaucho in many of his writings (including “Recuerdos de Provincia”, and even “Facundo”, where he writes with admiration about several typically Gaucho characters, a fact that “historians” like J.M. Rosa chose to ignore). Europeization was a cultural project that didn’t involve extermination, but education and development. It was a synonym of “progress” in Sarmiento’s lexicon. --Filius Rosadis 14:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

It envolved both. There is a famous qoute from him saying ("We need to water the Pampas with Gauchos' blood, that's the only human thing they have"). He sure believed in Extermination but also clearly education. (XGustaX 20:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC))

Sarmiento as President

It should also be noted that later in his life, Sarmiento confesed that when he was elected president, he commited fraud in the elections in order to win.

Historians like Felipe Pigna have also confirmed this.

I'd just like to note that the entire article is taken verbatim from http://www.mundoandino.com/Argentina/Domingo-Faustino-Sarmiento. Typically I wouldn't mind, but the site isn't even listed in the sources!

To do/future sections

Intro Youth and Influences Exiles Political background Personal Philosophy Written works --> Facundo Impact on Society (written works) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosefinn (talk • contribs) 21:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC) Impact on Education in Argentina and Chile Critisizms aliyah (talk) 21:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

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 11:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

aliyah (talk) 22:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Outline

Alright ladies, I suppose we best get on this. We decided that we were going to break it all down into these sections

Intro - Rose Youth and Influences - Aliyah Exiles - Laura Political background - Rose Personal Philosophy - Aliyah Written works --> Facundo Impact on Society - Laura written works list — All

So I'm just arbitrarily breaking it up. Shall we set a dead line to have this all sort of ready for a submission in one week? March 7th?

Sounds good, I also think we should meet up and sort out all of our information after we've all made more contributions, maybe at the end of the week or something. Let me know what works for you guys. Also, for Youth and Influences, how should that tie into the "Biography" section? The Biography portion is a lot of what Youth and Inlfuences would have, no? Should I just add some of his influences to the biography section and clean it up, or should there be an entirely new section? -Rose One more thing- I really don't know how to cite anything, I really messed up a section in there when adding to it because I don't know how to cite anything. Maybe we should get together a couple times in the next two weeks.-Rose —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosefinn (talk • contribs) 23:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC) aliyah (talk) 03:31, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rose, I think if you just insert the link the FA team should take care of editing the citations and making them work correctly. Our concern is to put everything up, they'll worry about editing it. aliyah (talk) 22:27, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, while we shouldn't abuse the generosity of the FA-Team, it's certainly true that what's most important right now is just to get the sourced material. We can deal with format and citation styles etc. later on. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 23:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I left a quick citation overview on the project talk page. For now, get the info in the article. If you want, also list your sources here, and we can show you how to put that specific source in the proper format. Karanacs (talk) 20:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool thanks! yeah I think we're just gonna try and get as much info as we can, and worry about citing after.aliyah (talk) 22:53, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Source

Hey all, I found a good source: http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/sarmiento-domingo-faustino. Check it out for more information, I've already begun to include a bit. Lpotto (talk) 04:15, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Laura, I'd say that was an OK source, but not a great one. Really, nothing beats a proper, published, scholarly source. For which nothing beats the library... --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 08:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

References

Hey we're having some trouble organizing our references on the article page and formatting them to wiki standards. Would someone be able to help us out with that? I tried...but it's gone wierd.aliyah (talk) 01:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I've fixed the formatting there. Here's the diff between the versions so you can see what I changed [1]. You can follow this format in the rest of the article too. If you're still confused, just say so here and I'll explain in more detail. Karanacs (talk) 16:15, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Status

we were just wondering what the status of our article is at? How do we move up to b-class?aliyah (talk) 22:18, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

girls check up this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_writing_better_articles#Lead_section for writing better articles and there are boxes on the bottom with links to more help as well!aliyah (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey! I'm from the FA-team. Things are looking good. I'd say you're at B-class now. I've just marked some areas that will need citations on the road to GA class. Be careful to include page numbers in your citations! Wrad (talk) 00:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Grand. On the basis of Wrad's judgement, I'm going to change the article class for the various projects at the head of this page. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 01:46, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Wrad! We'll work on that this week!aliyah (talk) 19:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Help!

Something seems to have messed up with the formatting, such that a whole section has become embedded within the endnotes... How did that happen? Can someone help? --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:59, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it. The problem was that the reference ended /ref instead of </ref>. Karanacs (talk) 16:25, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I figured it must have been something like that, but just couldn't see the bad code. Many thanks! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 16:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Lead

The lead needs to be exanded. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 23:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

In-line citations

The article needs to supply references to the sentences tagged. For example:

• "... fighting and war again resumed, and Sarmiento found himself fleeing to exile in Chile for the second time, where he stayed for five years."

An article can not be considered for GA nomination if there are any outstanding reference problems: see Quick fail criteria. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 13:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey wassupwestcoast... we're thinking about submitting our article for good article status. I'm not so sure we're quite there yet, but do you have any other advice before we go ahead and do that? Your help thus far has been greatly appreciated!! aliyah (talk) 20:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Pictures

How do you upload pictures??aliyah (talk) 21:03, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

If you look on the left hand sidebar, there is a link under toolbox called "Upload file". Click there or WP:Upload. Here's a help page too Wikipedia:Uploading_images. Karanacs (talk) 21:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions

You guys are doing a good job. Granted, I'm not that familiar with South American history, but there didn't appear to be that many big gaps. Here are a few things that I would recommend improving.

• The lead needs to be a little longer. Make sure that it adequately summarizes the whole article.
• Watch the use of words like "unfortunately". Those are usually judgement calls and often violate neutral point of view. I've taken out some of these but might have missed some.
• This is going to need a good copyedit when you are done with adding sources. It needs to flow pretty well.
• What, if anything, did Sarmiento do between 1823 and 1827?
• Why was he exiled in 1827?
• If he was under house arrest, how did he manage to get in trouble over his teaching style?
• The information about his grandson Augusto Belin Sarmiento seems a little out of place where it is currently located in the article.
• There are some areas that still need sourcing:
  • The whole paragraph that begins "Sarmiento entered Chile with certain ideas"
  • "The government of San Juan did not like Sarmiento's criticisms and censored the magazine by imposing an unaffordable tax upon each purchase. Sarmiento was forced to close down the publishing of the magazine in 1840. It had been during this time in which he had also founded a school for girls"
  • Don't forget about the citation needed tags in the article too.
• Make sure that the information about his works is in complete sentences
• The Legacy section needs to be fleshed out a bit if possible
• I don't know if this is a reliable source
  • http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/sarmiento-domingo-faustino
  • http://www.elhistoriador.com.ar/biografias/s/sarmiento.php

Karanacs (talk) 02:09, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much. This is totally what we needed. aliyah (talk) 03:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

GA nomination

I've nominated Domingo Faustino Sarmiento for GA nomination as there is a reasonable probability that it will meet a GA reviewer's expectations based on the GA criteria. There is still work to do! However, Domingo Faustino Sarmiento is quite good. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 02:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The lead

I saw this listed at GAN and I took a stab at fixing up the lead for you guys, but there are things that need to be updated/changed once the body of the article continues to improve. First of all, I changed the lead-in sentence to reflect that he "was an Argentinian writer and the seventh President of Argentina." The question is, is he remembered mostly as a writer or as a President? Which should go first? To add his nationality (usually a lead prerequisite), I made "writer" precede "President", but if someone has a better way of wording it, please do change it. Watch the phrasing: "Latin America respects him still as a political innovator and a great writer" may require a ref or further qualification. Also, that he is considered "The Teacher of Latin America" is not mentioned anywhere else in the article. Remember that WP:LEAD states that the lead section is a summary of everything in the body; therefore, nothing should be in the lead that isn't mentioned somewhere else in the article.

Best of luck in getting this to GA and beyond. :) María (habla conmigo) 15:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

GA hold

I'm placing this article on GA hold for seven days. Here's my assessment of the article per the criteria at WP:WIAGA.

1. Well-written:

a) Prose, spelling and grammar: fail. There are multiple problems with the prose. This is one area where I feel it's OK for a reviewer to get involved, so I will do a copyedit pass and see what issues come up as I do that. At the moment the text is not of GA standard; I won't give examples as you'll see some issues as I copyedit.

b) MOS compliance: fail. There are some MOS issues but the important ones are fine, and I will fix the main other problems as part of the copyedit.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:

a) References: fail. The following sources are of concern:

• enotes.com: I'm going to solicit other opinions on this, but this looks like a study notes guide and I don't think we should give this as much credence as a scholarly source. I'm also baffled by the way it's cited: it says "Zott, Lynn M, ed. (2003), "Sarmiento, Domingo Faustino: Introduction", Nineteenth-Century Literary Criticism, Gale Group, Inc" in the footnote, but it links to enotes. Is the text actually from the book named, but it's also on the website? If so I'd suggest you give a book citation and within the ref tags provide a separate link to the text.

I agree with this assessment of the enotes.com site. For what it's worth, the reason that the reference is given that way is that when you click on the page in question, that's the citation format it recommends. But the source should go. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Footnotes numbered 6 & 19, and possibly also 5, 21 and 24, are in Spanish and per the relevant guideline should have some way for readers to verify the English meaning. If you don't have an English source for this, the guideline says you should translate the relevant portions. I'll check around for precedents on this one but I am concerned about the heavy reliance on Spanish sources with no translation -- particularly footnote 6, which is used heavily.

And I agree especially with footnote 6, which looks to be a Spanish equivalent of something like enotes. However, more generally, this article may have to rely somewhat on Spanish-language sources. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Footnotes 25-27 and 31-32 have page numbers of "??".
• Your footnotes style is one I'm not personally familiar with, but it looks like you're using "author, year, page"; you need to add the year in some cases.

b) Citations: pass.

c) No original research: pass.

3. Broad coverage.

a) Addresses the major aspects of the topic: fail. This is my greatest concern about the article. Take a look at the article on Benjamin Disraeli, who was also a writer and politician. There is far more detail on Disraeli's political life in that article than you have on Sarmiento in this one. I know nothing about Sarmiento, but it seems likely that there are a lot more sources on his politics that could be used to expand this part of the article.

You know, the more I look into this (and I'm no expert on nineteenth-century Latin America), the clearer it becomes to me that he's not much of a politician. He's a writer: mostly an activist, journalist, and pamphleteer. He does hold numerous bureaucratic and political positions (up to and including president of the country, though he's not particularly distinguished at that), but mostly what he's doing is churning out endless tracts and books. Now, only two of these are read today (the two we have currently as major works); but if anything we should stress that he's an intellectual more. It's only today that we've first mentioned his membership in the so-called "Generation of 1837." I think this is what should be played up more. Perhaps closer examples than Disraeli might be André Malraux or José Vasconcelos. Or in Latin America, Rómulo Gallegos, though again (to my shame) this latter is a figure I don't know as much about as I should! Anyhow, that's my 2c. after a bit of research. So I don't think this article is quite as out of line as it appeared. Still, more can indeed be done. And it is getting much better, I think. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll rely on you to tell me when the appropriate broadness of coverage is achieved, since you're doing the research and I don't have any independent knowledge of the topic. Let me know when you think we're there and I'll mark this as a pass. Mike Christie (talk) 10:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

b) Stays focused: pass.

4. Neutral: pass, barring some words that can be eliminated as part of the copyedit.

5. Stable: pass.

6. Image use: pass, though I'd suggest adding at least a picture of a cover of Facundo.

I will follow this up with a copyedit (probably today), and I'll make a separate list of the issues I find there, in another talk page section. I would expect that the issues I find will mostly not need to be fixed for GA, but I'll have to see what comes up. Mike Christie (talk) 17:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Copyedit notes on first two sections

Here are some notes on issues I found during copyediting the first two sections, "Youth and Influences" and "Political background and exiles". These are divided into ones which should be fixed for GA, and ones which are not necessary for GA but which may be useful after GA. I'll work on the other sections when I have time; it may not be till later in the week, so I wanted to post these here now so you can see them. Mike Christie (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Fixes needed for GA

Some of the points in this section may not be necessary for GA but I can't be sure without more information; the first one is an example of this.

• I know little about Spanish names, but I noticed in the Gabriel García Márquez article that he is almost always referred to as García Márquez. If you tell me that "Sarmiento" is the correct way to refer to this chap, I'll believe you, but I would have expected the naming convention to be the same for both articles.

Heh. Very observant! We could refer to him as Sarmiento Albarracín. But often people from Hispanic countries go by just the first of their two surnames: Carlos Fuentes, for instance, or Miguel Ángel Asturias. What is definitely wrong is to use only the second surname (e.g. "Mario Llosa" or "Gabriel Márquez"). --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 06:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

So is sticking with Sarmiento ok? Or should I go through and change it to Sarmiento Albarracin. My only argument against that is that he is known as just Sarmiento most often, even in the books we've used to research.aliyah (talk) 03:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Nah, leave him as "Sarmiento." It is indeed how he's almost universally known. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Works for me. Mike Christie (talk) 03:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Shouldn't "doña" be "Doña"?

As per Lpotto's revisions, this should be done now. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 02:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. Mike Christie (talk) 02:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Can you provide a short explanation after "la Escuela de la Patria", such as "la Escuela de la Patria, a primary school in San Juan"? Not everyone will know that la Escuela means "school".

As per Lpotto's revisions, this should be done now. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 02:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Also done. Mike Christie (talk) 02:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• The first paragraph in the "Political Background and Exiles" section is confusing for a couple of reasons. Why was he in exile? No reason is given; was he politically opposed to the government? Had the government suddenly become repressive? Did he have dangerous family connections? Or do you just mean that he left San Juan? And if this town is the one now known as San Francisco del Monte de Oro, then it's in Argentina, so in what sense was this an exile?

• I've tried to clarify this, though my sources don't mention this episode. I'm not sure if it is San Francisco del Monte de Oro. It would be good if whoever has the Bunkley book could clarify. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 04:44, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

This is much improved. Mike Christie (talk) 23:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• The Political Background section has him going from house arrest to being an innovative teacher with no transition; you need to do something to smooth this. If you have absolutely no information, just say so -- "nothing is known of how long the house arrest lasted, but two years later it is known that he was teaching in a school in San Juan" or something to that effect.

This has been fixed. Mike Christie (talk) 23:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

*This paragraph: "Sarmiento entered Chile with certain ideas that he had developed from his extensive reading. In Chile he fine-tuned his personal philosophy, and many of his political ideologies were manifested during this second exile. As his ideas became increasingly clarified and his writing began to have a clear message of enlightenment, he began to prove himself as a great political force. Within four years time, Sarmiento became known as one of Chile's outstanding journalists." has a couple of issues:

• • There are several phrases here that don't actually provide any information, and which should be made more specific: "certain ideas", "fine-tuned his personal philosophy", "his political ideologies were manifested", "ideas became increasingly clarified", "a clear message of enlightenment", "a great political force". What ideas did he have? What was the personal philosophy that he fine-tuned? What was his political ideology (there's been no description of it at all to this point)? In what form were they manifested -- in his writing, his friends, his political actions? What ideas were clarified? What is "enlightenment" in this context (I think of Zen buddhism when I hear that word, but that may not be what you mean!) In what way was he a political force -- through his journalism? Or do you mean his ideas, later shown to be powerful during his presidency, were honed at this time?

I believe I scratched this paragraph, please feel free to un-strike through any of this...I just need a visual so we can continue working through the list aliyah (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this is fixed. No problem on the strikeouts -- some editors don't like it, so it's good if you can find another way to track progress, but I'm fine with it. Mike Christie (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• His journalism hasn't been mentioned to this point -- when did he begin to write? In Chile? What sort of journalism -- political commentary? Working for salary as a new reporter?

This has also been addressed. Mike Christie (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

*What did he do between 1840, when he had to cease publishing El Zondo, and 1845?

I just added this info aliyah (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, looks good. Mike Christie (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

*What's interesting about his meeting with General Echeverria? It is mentioned with no explanation or context.

I removed this. aliyah (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. Mike Christie (talk) 16:00, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• How did he get a commission from the Peruvian government to travel internationally -- was this based on his reputation, or connections, or did he apply for such a position?

I'm just going to drop this; it's interesting but on reflection I don't think this is necessary for GA. Perhaps not even for FA -- his credentials as an educational expert are more clearly established, with the revisions that have been done to the article, and that makes his role for Peru much more plausible and hence less in need of explanation. Mike Christie (talk) 23:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• Along the same lines, it's evident by this point in the article that he was regarded as knowledgeable about education. There hasn't been much said about the details, though: he started a school and taught for a while -- that's all the article mentions, which seems a little thin.

The additional info about his educational opinions and activities addresses this. Mike Christie (talk) 23:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• The chronology between 1848 and 1852 is confusing. In 1848 he becomes an advisor; and "during this period" goes to Chile -- in 1848? Presumably so, since "During this same year" he meets Benita, so let's say that's 1848. Did he also write Facundo in 1848? When did he start the periodicals?

• I tell ya, this guy's chronology is confusing all around. I've been trying to sort this out, and will try again; whoever has the copy of Crowley can perhaps help out. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm striking this; the added text is enough for GA. Some formatting is needed but I'll take care of that later. The date for Facundo given is odd, though; later it says it came out in 1845 -- which is right? Mike Christie (talk) 22:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

*I've commented about the lack of detail on his political involvement already, but here's another example: he "strengthened his efforts against Rosas": this is the first we've heard that Rosas is in power, or that Sarmiento opposed him. And what does "strengthened his efforts" mean? Was he writing political polemics? Organizing political opposition? Was his departure to Chile politically motivated at all, even though it was voluntary? If we know which year Argentina tried to have him extradited, that would be a good piece of information to add too. And why was he sent back to Chile in 1854?

I've clarified some of this. aliyah (talk) 22:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I struck out the rest of this; I think it's either clarified or not sufficiently important. Mike Christie (talk) 16:19, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• "Four years later, Sarmiento returned to San Juan and became the governor of the province": more detail would be good here -- was it an appointment or an election? Did he represent a particular political party? Was the election contested? Given that he was thrown out of Argentina only a few years earlier, I think you should explain how it's possible he was able to return, and win a political post.

I think I've cleared this up. Ugh, this guy had a complicated life. Anyhow, they're throwing me out of the library now, so I can't do any more on this (as I can't take library books out!) until probably next week. But I think I've advanced quite a bit. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:48, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That's good enough, I think. Mike Christie (talk) 23:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

-- Mike Christie (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments and suggestions (not needed for GA)

• A map of Argentina might be useful if you can find a free one.

I'm going to strike this since you've added a map, but if you can find one showing some of the places mentioned such as San Juan and Buenos Aires, that would be great. Mike Christie (talk) 03:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

And here are a whole series of maps of Argentina, for inspiration... --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• Was the small school in the Andes at San Francisco del Monte, or somewhere else? It reads ambiguously at the moment.
• "Upon Sarmiento's return, the province of San Juan broke out into civil war. Facundo Quiroga invaded Sarmiento's town": A couple of suggestions here. First, can you add an explanatory phrase to the end of the first sentence, saying who the civil war was between (e.g. "... into civil war between the Federalists and Royalists" or whoever it was); and then add a note to Facundo Quiroga indicating which side he was on? Second, can you give the town's name instead of saying "Sarmiento's town"; I assume it's San Juan.
• I assume that "General Paz" is José María Paz; if so a wikilink would be good. It would also be good to indicate which side in the conflict he was on; if you identify the sides per my comment just above, that would help.
• "Due to his innovative style of teaching, he found himself in conflict with the governor of the province": this is interesting enough to warrant more details, if you have them. What was innovative about his teaching? What did the governor do? Evidently, if Sarmiento could start a new school, the governor was unable to shut him down; or was Pocura in a different province?
• I couldn't find any references to Pocura at all on the web, and I checked Google Maps and the gazetteer of a comprehensive atlas without finding anything. Could you check that this is not a typo for a similar name? If it's correct, could you give some hint of its location in the text (e.g. "Pocura, a small town near San Juan")?
• Is anything known about the mother of Ana Faustina?
• "Fighting and war soon again broke out": can you be a bit more specific? E.g. "A new civil war broke out again in late 1830"; or "The civil war had never really ceased, and fighting broke out again in San Juan in 1831", or whatever applies here.
• The quote of Sarmiento's about Chile needs a touch more context. How about "After his return to Argentina, Sarmiento expressed admiration for Chile: "Security of property ..."" etc?
• Are any more details known about the school for girls that he founded in the late 1830s, such as the name, and whether it still exists?
• "an educational advisor to governors"; it would be good to be more specific, if possible. I assume from context that it means he advised state governors within Argentina; he goes to Chile again at this time, so perhaps he also advised governors there?
• Since this is a biography, it would be nice to say where he lived in Chile when he was there; Santiago? This applies to both stints in Chile.
• Where did he meet Benita Martinez Pastoriza? Did they marry? If so, when and where? Was Domingo Fidel her son? If so, I'd say "adopted her son"; if not, a line about how the adoption occurred would be good.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

References question(s)

Many of these references need more information. And here are two that contradict each other:

   * Crowley, Francis G. (1972), Sarmiento, New York: Twayne, ISBN ??
   * Crowley, Frances C. "Domingo Faustino Sarmiento". New York: Twayne Publishers, 1972.

So, what is the author's name (Frances G. or Frances C.) and what's the book title (Sarmiento or Domingo Faustino Sarmiento)? Plus it would be good to have the ISBN. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I fixed the Crowley reference, but I can't find the ISBN. THe same goes for the Patton book. I have a Libary of Congress Catalog Card Number? But I don't know how useful that is.aliyah (talk) 03:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

If you physically have the book, then you should find the ISBN inside it, probably opposite the title page. But it's possible it doesn't have an ISBN: older books don't always. If so, no sweat. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

More references

Here are some possible English-language references. They should be enough at the least to replace the "historiador" source discussed as a bad source above:

• Enrique Anderson Imbert, "Domingo Faustino Sarmiento." Americas 1972 24(2): S6-S11. At Koerner's at F1401 .A6.

• Colin M. Lewis, Argentina: A Short Jistory. Oxford : Oneworld, 2002. At Koerner's at F2831 .L686 2002.

• David Rock, Argentina, 1516-1982: From Spanish Colonization to the Falklands War. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985. At Koerner's at F2831 .R68 1985.

• Joseph T. Criscenti (ed.), Sarmiento and his Argentina. Boulder, Colo.: L. Rienner Publishers, 1993. Order from Okanagan: F2846.S26 S27 1993.

The last of these looks especially useful! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 07:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Caption

Someone ought to translate the caption into English.

Daguerrotipo de Domingo Faustino Sarmiento de 1852, luego de la batalla de Caseros.Autor desconocido, el original se encuentra en el Museo Histórico Sarmiento (Argentina).Tomado de "La Fotografía en la Historia Argentina", Tomo I, Clarin, 2005.

My guess of the first bit is "Daguerotype of Domingo Faustino Sarmiento in 1852 ..." :-) Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The best I can do is "... after the battle of Caseros. Author unknown, the original is hung in the Sarmiento Historical Musuem (Argentina). Taken of "Photograph in the History of Argentina,"... Not sore what the Tomo I, Clarin, 2005 is referring to. And I'm not sure how I'm supposed to put it on the site, would it be the spanish caption of the photo and then the english, or would the spanish caption be replaced entirely? aliyah (talk) 21:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

What Tomo I Clarín - 2005 refers to is Set I (Tome I) of the four-set of books published by Clarín Newspaper (Buenos Aires) in 2005. -- Alexf⁴² 22:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Remaining copyedit notes

Much less from the second half, you'll be glad to see. As before, these are divided into ones which should be fixed for GA, and ones which are not necessary for GA but which may be useful after GA.

You might consider looking at the Facundo article for some of the political background material; they've done a good job. I don't know what your professor's attitude will be to that! But if it's good material, I'd say use it. You may need to check refs again, especially if you need to rework it to fit your context. Mike Christie (talk) 03:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Your professor actively encourages you to share resources. Note, however, that when you copy over sourced material, you will need also to copy over the sources themselves if they're not in your article already. --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 04:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixes needed for GA

*Rosas is sometimes referred to as "Rosas" and sometimes as "Don Juan Manuel"; are these interchangeable? It's fine if they are, but you might consider making them consistent to ease comprehension for readers not familiar with these names.

Replaced all with Don Juan Manuel Rosas aliyah (talk) 22:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The name he was know as was: Don Juan Manuel de Rosas -- Alexf⁴² 22:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• "as a political prisoner in Chile": was he really a political prisoner? This isn't mentioned in the earlier section. It sounds from the earlier text as though this should just read "years in exile in Chile".
• Generally I think the section "President of Argentina" is too short; I understand from jbmurray that he is regarded as a literary figure, but his government deserves a bit more detail. Consider what a reader who is researching Argentinian political history would expect to read; you can give more information than such a reader would need on Sarmiento's literary background, but you can't provide less than they would want to see on his political history.

He was President and he was a literary figure, having been published beforehand. -- Alexf⁴² 22:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I've just expanded that section a bit. It does look as though he wasn't much cop as president! --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 03:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Enough has been added; I'm striking this objection. Mike Christie (talk) 23:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

• The missing dates in the publication history section should be supplied.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 03:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Corrected it to Don Juan Manuel de Rosas aliyah (talk) 22:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

This looks like a misplaced response; the dates I'm talking about are in the publications list. Mike Christie (talk) 23:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Comments and suggestions (not needed for GA)

• "was thought to never have been the same again": if this is a direct quote from a secondary source, I'd put it in quotes and cite it directly. If not, and perhaps in any case, it would be good to be more specific if the sources support any more detail. Did he change in personality? Or did he often speak to others of his grief, for the rest of his life?
• The Red Line would bring goods to Buenos Aires; where from? Presumably from a port somewhere on the Río de la Plata?
• "These ideas he most equated to Rome and to the United States": this isn't quite what you mean to say; he didn't equate an idea to Rome. Do you mean something like "These ideas were inspired primarily from his study of the history of Rome, and the knowledge of the United States he drew from his trip there in the 1840s"?

-- Mike Christie (talk) 03:45, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Note on citations

Just a note on the citations -- recently someone removed the first citation named "historiador". If you use a citation lots of times, you can just use the name after the first time. If you later eliminate the first use of the citation, then you've deleted all the actual citation information, and the later references to "historiador" can't figure out what the citation is. That results in a version of the footnotes that looks like this (scroll down to the footnotes section). I fixed this by recovering the old footnotes text from an old version of the article, and putting it back in. If it happens again, and you can't figure out how to fix it, don't worry about it; I'll fix it next time I edit the article. Mike Christie (talk) 03:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that...I didn't even notice I'd deleted it. Thanks! I appreciate the fix!aliyah (talk) 04:09, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

...I think I did it again...sorry... :S aliyah (talk) 04:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yup, but I fixed it. In some ways it's a good sign, as you're slowly but surely getting rid of citations to what's a bad source!  :) --jbmurray (talk|contribs) 05:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Summary of what's needed for GA

I've just gone through again, and here's a list of what's needed for GA: a much shorter list and I hope doable without much trouble.

• The enotes.com site needs to go. It looks like it's only being used for some basic info, so I'll see what I can do after I write up these notes by way of finding a replacement.

If you Google "sarmiento February 15 1811 JSTOR" you get a JSTOR link that I can't access but which looks like it could be used to cite this. Mike Christie (talk) 23:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any enotes citations listed in the bottom of the page there, but I googled that JSTOR link and what that is is a list of important dates and events in Latin American history, so it doesn't really list out the important stuff thru Sarmiento's life. The Crowley book isn't comprehensive enough, and I don't have the Bunkley book at the moment so I'm kinda s.o.l at the moment as far as replacing sources. aliyah (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It's the first footnote, listed as "Zott, Lynn M"; it seems to be used only for his date and place of birth. If the JSTOR article has that information, I'd suggest you substitute that; if not, then I'd suggest deleting it as the information is not really controversial. It should be sourced for FA but it's OK to leave this out for GA. Mike Christie (talk) 20:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

No more enotes! :) aliyah (talk) 21:33, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

*The page numbers in the citations 15, 16 and 48 should be added. (Or delete the references if they're not needed.) If this is the only remaining problem, I would probably pass the article, since the work itself is cited, but the page numbers should really be there.

I've included the page numbers aliyah (talk) 15:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• The prose needs a copyedit. I'll do that and if I have any remaining questions about your intentions I'll leave a note.

Copyedit done; no more issues. Mike Christie (talk) 00:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

*The dates of Sarmiento's publications should be added. Actually, for GA I think you could also get away with just deleting the dates and leaving these other works in a list without dates. That's obviously not the best answer, and wouldn't work at FA, but the dates aren't critical to our understanding of Sarmiento. What I don't think you can do at GA is have the question-marks.

I removed the quesiton marks, and will continue to search for the missing dates. aliyah (talk) 19:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

• The date of Facundo is given as 1845 at one point and 1848 at another; which is correct?

The reference to 1848 has been deleted so this is now OK. Mike Christie (talk) 00:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

*One more thing came up in the copyedit: there are two citation-needed flags. Please either delete the relevant sentences or provide a citation.

Now just one citation needed flag left. Mike Christie (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

cleaned up that last citation flag. I'll keep working through the list too. Thanks so much!! :) aliyah (talk) 18:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I will check with jbmurray on the broadness of coverage of Sarmiento's political career, but I suspect that is now fixed. I'm also going to let the historiador site through GA. I don't have any way of evaluating its reliability, though that would have to come up at FA. It can no doubt be improved, but if it supports the information you're using I think that's good enough for GA.

This is now very close to GA. Mike Christie (talk) 23:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Passed GA

I have passed this article as a GA. Congratulations to everyone who worked on it! Mike Christie (talk) 22:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)