This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Articles for creation This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC This article was accepted from this draft on 26 November 2023 by reviewer Vanderwaalforces (talk · contribs). Electronic literature This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electronic literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electronic literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electronic literatureWikipedia:WikiProject Electronic literatureTemplate:WikiProject Electronic literatureElectronic literature

This was originally the class demonstration article for researching and writing about influential works of electronic literature. We did review it in the office hours for Wikieducation. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 18:24, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As we do intend to create more articles about the notable and influential works of electronic literature as part of a planned project, please be specific about what this article needs so we can learn and improve. Thank you! LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 18:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you indicate two or three independent sources that write about this work at some length (not just mention it in passing)? - Jmabel | Talk 03:32, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel Thanks. I have added the Landow reference, where he cites this and spends 3 pages analyzing the work. Also, could you help me figure out what is wrong with my Landow reference? I don't see the extraneous text from the parameter value?

I thought these references were substantial?

The GPS Museum reference has 3 pages on this work, which I thought was substantial.

The American Cultural Resources Association article is 2 pages with photos (out of a 17 page work). These early newsletters were a bit rough because GPS was just beginning to gain prominence. (Think early references to Edison at the time... not much interest, but pretty important looking back).

The reason this is notable is that it is one of the very first locative hypertexts and possibly the first to use GPS technology. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 18:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. Landow reference fixed.
2. I think what you say here answers my question. @Vanderwaalforces: does this meet your concern about demonstrated notability; if not, can you be clear about where it falls short? - Jmabel | Talk 18:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   @Jmabel Nice nice! Thanks for following up with this. If @LoveElectronicLiterature re-submits this, you can just accept it or ping me, so that I will. Many thanks again. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:06, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   Thank you all. We greatly appreciate your insights. BTW, we are working on a proposal for ELMCIP (a vetted electronic literature database) to go into Wikidata. And we are working on a project for electronic lit so we can track these article creations. I still don't quite get how that works, but I am learning!LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 02:00, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

   LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 03:10, 26 November 2023 (UTC)@Jmable, what was wrong with my Landow reference so I know not to do that again? Thanks![reply]

   • @LoveElectronicLiterature I just saw this. Please, if you want to ping someone, either use {{ping}} (or equivalent) or write out the correctly spelled user link (e.g. in my case "User:Jmabel", not "Jmable"). (Also, we usually sign comments at the end of the line, not the beginning.)
   • The error that messed with template functionality is that you wrote "pages 247 - 250" instead of "pages = 247 - 250". Also, less importantly, presuming "University Press" was part of the publisher's name it should be capitalized (if not it should be omitted). - Jmabel | Talk 21:55, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

     Thank you! I will learn @User:Jmabel LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 02:17, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]