Jump to content

Talk:2021 Salvadoran political crisis

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

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:2021 Salvadoran political crisis/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: FredModulars (talk · contribs) 13:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than happy to review this! I will be adding comments in the next few days. FredModulars (talk) 13:00, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

[edit]
Good Article Status - Review Criteria

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
  2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  9. [4]
  10. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  11. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review

[edit]
  1. Well-written:
  2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) Well done Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) See comments on lead Pass Pass
  3. Verifiable with no original research:
  4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) Pass Pass
  5. Broad in its coverage:
  6. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) Well done Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) Well done Pass Pass
  7. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  8. Notes Result
    Pass Pass
  9. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  10. Notes Result
    Nothing outstanding to warrant an "edit war" Pass Pass
  11. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
  12. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) See comments Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Would be nice to see more images in the article (such as non-free images here), but media seems adequate for now Pass Pass

Result

[edit]
Result Notes
Pass Pass

Discussion

[edit]

Comments (1 July)

[edit]

Criteria 1

[edit]
  • ~~The lead is good, but it would be nice to add a brief mention of the background of the incident. It's a little confusing to have the incident described without any context.~~
    • Added a brief mention at the end to tie in with the self-coup comments by the opposition.
  • ~~Please add a link to Attorney General of El Salvador in the lead.~~
    • Linked. Didn't even know that page existed.
  • ~~Comma in Territorial Control Plan, should come after the quotes. Is there even a need for the quotes?~~
    • Checked, and there shouldn't be quotes.
  • ~~The link to the 2020 Salvadoran protests should be "protests against Bukele", not "protests". It makes it seem that protests is being linked.~~
    • Fixed.

Critera 2–6

[edit]

I'll just make it clear I can't read Spanish and I don't want to take a chance with an online translator (I've seen bad mistakes in the past). I'll have to assume all content citing Spanish sources have what they claim to say. All sources look reliable, but I will have to go through them in order to fact-check what is in the article. FredModulars (talk) 11:14, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article has significant coverage of the event, displays all points of view of the topic, and there is nothing substantial enough to say there's an edit dispute or war. Excellent job! I am not an expert on images, non-free images, and fair use, but from what I understand this article satisfies 6a.

The article seems to be in great shape. After the issues above are addressed, I will most likely be promoting the article. FredModulars (talk) 03:56, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • All done! Thank you for reviewing this article. Apologies for the delay in my response as I was in El Salvador when this was nominated and wifi there for me is really only possible when I'm in San Salvador. Pizzaking13 (Hablame) 17:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! I remember seeing your comment on the GAN for the 2020 political crisis and acknowledged I'd have to wait a while. It's all good though, I'll be promoting this article since all outstanding changes have been addressed. Congratulations and great job on your work! FredModulars (talk) 18:40, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.