Talk:Lourdes Ortiz

draft comments

Hi @Martinagonzalez95: I'm providing online support for your class at UMD and I have a few comments on your draft:

• I've found a few sources in literary journals on Ortiz's work. I see that you're sticking to biographical sources and that's good, but there's some detail I found in them which I think can help improve the draft:
  • JSTOR 30225456 and JSTOR 23021384 both talk about her work in detective fiction and in particular the interesting nature her work in post Franco Spain.
  • JSTOR 27741804 (p. 51) situates Urraca (which I think was published as Magpie when translated) in a feminist narrative and JSTOR 30203558 approaches the same work from a different angle.
  • ISBN 0874133866 (if you can find it) has a chapter on Ortiz
  • How you use these is up to you, but I think there's a fair amount there (and many sources I didn't list here) which can offer some color on her works.
• You've got a good structure down for this draft. I'd take a look at Janise Yntema for some formatting ideas and examples, as it's a fairly good (but not overly complicated) article in much the same vein as yours. Specifically the "lead" section at the top doesn't need a section heading and you can see where certain interesting or salient people, concepts or things are "wikilinked" (e.g. we can link Madrid and El País and so forth). also you'll note that section titles (e.g. "Famous Works") are not title cased. The first word is capitalized, after that everything (save proper nouns) are lowercase.
• I think the famous works section might be improved with some of the sources I've mentioned above. We can point to articles reviewing her books to provide readers with a quick summary of the themes or interesting elements. I would also recommend swapping in the term "notable" for "famous"--both are pretty subjective but the former is pretty common on wikipedia for biographies of artists/authors.
• The "other works" section could be partially turned into a bulleted list (like the one I'm writing here). Each work can be listed on its own line starting with an asterisk, which will render a list. You may decide that an encyclopedia article doesn't need to have a complete bibliography, but that's largely up to you.
• Remember that if you want to make a linebreak in Wikipedia, you need a blank line between elements, so:

this is on one line. But this is as well.

This is on its own line.

And this is on another.

• To get around that you can start each line with an asterisk, which will (as mentioned above) render a little bullet and you won't have to add the linebreak.
• You may keep references in MLA format if you like, but I think you'll find working with inline citations more comfortable as you go and most readers of wikipedia articles expect to see those little superscripted numbers pointing to a reference list. If you prefer you can maintain your MLA format for referencing and use inline citations, see User:Adam (Wiki Ed)/authordate for an example (That's author date but it could just as easily be simply "author").

Other than that I think this is a good start. I'm looking forward to seeing more! Adam (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:15, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

I put the list of works in a bulleted list, per Adam's comments above and did some minor formatting. I don't know how frequently her full name is used, but the ISNI authority control record for her states her name is also known as María Lourdes Ortiz Sánchez.--CaroleHenson (talk) 07:09, 8 November 2014 (UTC)