User talk:Maria Cuervo
Welcome!
Welcome, new editor! We're very glad you've joined us. Here are pointers for a quick start. Also, when you get a chance, please read The Editor Role. You can look at Getting Started for other helpful introductory pages. It is essential for you as an editor to join the Citizendium-Editors mailing list in order to stay abreast of editor-related issues. If you wish, just ask me to create a "personal sandbox" for you where you can test out editing and writing articles. If you need help to get going, it is a good idea to join our discussion forums. That's where we discuss policy, proposals or technical problems. You can ask any constable for help, too. Just put a note on their "talk" page. Again, welcome and thank you! We appreciate your willingness to share your expertise, and we hope to see you begin actively editing and contributing to Citizendium. Milton Beychok 01:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on your Editorships !!
Congratulations Maria! You have been confirmed as an Editor in our Classics workgroup, Literature workgroup and Philosophy workgroup.
Please take the time to read and to study all of the articles available at the blue wiki links in the above Welcome message. In particular, the one entitled The Author Role is very important to study in depth,
You should also read these motions passed by our recently elected Editorial Council: [1], [[2] and [3]. The three of them all relate to the role and the qualifications of Editors in Citizendium. Take your time to study and to understand them ... and then implement their requirements if applicable. If you need help understanding any of the three passed motions, contact Hayford Pierce, the Secretary of our Editorial Council.
Again, congratulations and enjoy yourself here! Milton Beychok 01:40, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you! It's great to be here. In a previous career lasting a decade I worked as a programmer at a PBS affiliate [Web] so I'm hoping that the minimal coding here is a puzzle I figure out quickly! I'm reading the links you suggested, plus I already created a page. Now I need to figure out the meta and talk pages. And maybe join some work groups. Fun! --Maria Cuervo 03:42, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, Maria, great to see you here -- we could sure use some Lit. Editors! Although my own contributions (and interests) are determinedly lo-Lit.: strange to think that the trash fiction I used to read 50 years ago (and then wrote for a while) is now the entire composition of the NYT bestseller lists! Whatever happened to *serious* writers who were for the first eight decades of the 20th century the only people reviewed? And to sell? On the other hand, who remembers A.J. Cronin and such-like? Hope you enjoy yourself here -- and maybe someday I'll try to get you to Approve some of my articles such as Mr. Calder and Mr. Behrens and The Headmaster -- there really isn't much to add to them, I would say.... Hayford Peirce 04:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- I'd be happy to Hayford. As well, I hope that any of you feel free to point me on a better path since I am, like Socrates, still learning to "know myself," in this case, learning to know Citizendium! --Maria Cuervo 19:16, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, Maria, great to see you here -- we could sure use some Lit. Editors! Although my own contributions (and interests) are determinedly lo-Lit.: strange to think that the trash fiction I used to read 50 years ago (and then wrote for a while) is now the entire composition of the NYT bestseller lists! Whatever happened to *serious* writers who were for the first eight decades of the 20th century the only people reviewed? And to sell? On the other hand, who remembers A.J. Cronin and such-like? Hope you enjoy yourself here -- and maybe someday I'll try to get you to Approve some of my articles such as Mr. Calder and Mr. Behrens and The Headmaster -- there really isn't much to add to them, I would say.... Hayford Peirce 04:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Congratulations and welcome! Although my editorship is in the "dismal science", I have a strong amateur interest in philosophy, and it's great to have a professional among us again (our founder was well qualified in philosophy, but he is no longer active). When you have a moment to spare, you might like to glance at my attempt at a philosophy of economics - which is much in need of improvement. I am even more of an amateur in literary matters, but I am a Tolkein junkie - having read the Lord of the Rings 4 times and watched the film twice! I'd love to see a CZ article about him. But I hope you will do what interests you here, and enjoy doing it. In my experience it can be absorbing and satisfying, and it has me in touch with interesting colleagues all over the world Nick Gardner 06:30, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Maria, congratulations on your many wide-ranging accomplishments, and thanks for bringing your talents and interests to Citizendium. I look forward to following your work and learning from it.
- I've spent most of my 70+ years focusing on chemistry, biology, and the health sciences, but always distracted by the history and philosohy of those subjects, so I've contributed in those latter areas as well, with many articles still under very slow development. I would welcome your thoughts and input. Best wishes. —Anthony.Sebastian 16:07, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Hayford, are you saying you do or do not want to see A.J. Cronin works? I've read two books of his and didn't think of them as serious or not, but I liked them. :-) Howard C. Berkowitz 04:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you to all. A warning in philosophy is that it is a discipline that centers on arguments. And philosophers like to argue in both senses of that word. I myself do not care for arguing in the mundane sense but I like to distinguish fine points. I look forward to the wonderful company and exchange of ideas. If anyone has pages that they would like for me to look at, please give a shout. I am still a novice around here and might not have all the hallways scoped out.--Maria Cuervo 04:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Simply amazing!!
Maria, the speed at which you learned about wiki markup coding and about how to create a metadata template and an article "cluster" is simply amazing!! There is no other word for it!
Keep it up and keep enjoying it. - Milton Beychok 17:59, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you. I'm suspecting that I am missing a few boats and getting wet but so far, so good! Just the little I did reminded me of how much there is to do. Many terms and words I thought should be there, are not. I'll be working on that. Many of the terms will have applications in other disciplines, periods of history, literature, etc., so this type of groundwork will not be in vain. I plan to avoid borrowing content from others since there is really no need to do so, except perhaps in the use of free domain images which enhance the text or article.--Maria Cuervo 19:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Just one thing. I note that you have not included any references at all for any of the articles that you have already created. If the problem is that you have not yet assimilated how to create embedded in-text references, then I suggest that you read this help article: Help:Index/Formatting/References. Regards, - Milton Beychok 19:27, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I had not tackled this yet and had not found the page explaining how to do it. :] While I was figuring out how to do the basic editing, I started to write some basic content. I too noticed the glaring lack of references. I'll start to work on that next, before adding more content. --Maria Cuervo 22:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
- A fudged borderline. An Early Modern text let slide through. My group was chaired by a professor interested in monsters and the strange in Medieval imagery. Winter's tale had a sufficient link to this to be deemed relevant.--Maria Cuervo 03:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Back to editing very soon.
I'm in the middle of writing a paper due on Monday so have been absent.....The paper is contentious in that it highlights the mundane sense of arguing and how that bleeds into the better sense of the word. I would like to think that philosophers are most interested in the difference between their thought than in coming to an agreement. What makes knowledge, and the illusion that we can claim something as being authoritatively right in interpretation or other features so difficult is the amount of disagreement that can be had among scholars.