Talk:Antonio Luna/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: DCI2026 (talk · contribs) 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing each section individually, then will post a checklist that will show where the article stands at the end of the review. Please take as long as is needed to respond to my comments. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The lead could be expanded a little, perhaps to two paragraphs, and would benefit from key facts being placed in a first paragraph and details of his military command in the second. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Family background

"His father was a traveling salesman of the products of government monopolies." Could this statement be better phrased? dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any sources that could be added to the sentence discussing his brother Juan, the artist? dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Education

Was his education by Maestro Intong undertaken from the age of six? How long did this education last? dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Doctrina Cristiana seems to have been an important achievement/heritage element of the Philippines, could there be any more background on it? dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph would read more smoothly if the last sentence was split up into two or three separate ones, detailing the circumstances of his travel to Spain and what he did at each university he attended there. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reform propagandist

Would there be a way to include more information on why he became involved in the reformist movement? As the article stands now, it only tells what he did, not why. If there aren't many sources detailing his motivations, it's fine, but it would be helpful to a reader in understanding the subject. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

His activities as a propagandist and his alter ego of a respected scientist might be broken into two sub-sections, with level 3 headers. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is stated that Luna took a competition to receive the job of chief chemist at the Manila institute; perhaps "examination", if the word works, would fit better. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could a source, or, preferably, two sources be added to "When he learned of the underground societies that were planning a revolution and was asked to join, he scoffed at the idea and turned down the offer. Like other Filipino émigrés, he was in favor of reform rather than revolution as the way towards independence." dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First names should not be used except when it is absolutely necessary to distinguish between brothers. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd advise against using phrases like "nail down", there's nothing really wrong with them but less colloquial phrasing is normally better. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Spanish queen regent should be identified and linked. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could there be more info on the planning for the "revolutionary war"? When and why did he decide to join it; as he had formerly been opposed to conflict, did the imprisonment force him into changing his mind? dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life

This section is quite abrupt; little is mentioned of Luna's other relationships, if any are known, in the article until this point. Information could be clarified, and Luna's first name doesn't need to be used. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Words like "fortunately" or "tragedy" ought to be avoided; some might have differing opinions on those matters. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Philippine-American War

The section should be broken down, it is rather long and level 3 headers would do the trick. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Background information on the Spanish-American War and the Philippine insurgency is needed. dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This statement could be re-phrased. "Luna thought the Filipinos should just walk in and enter Intramuros to have joint occupation of the walled city." dci | TALK 23:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The second paragraph needs more sources, particularly when you're talking about the generals envious of Luna. dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do a copyedit of this section from the third paragraph until the last; I'm now moving on to "Death". dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Death

More information on the circumstances of his death could be included in the lead. dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do a second copyedit for parts of this section, too. dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"As he went up the stairs, he ran into an officer whom he had previously disarmed for cowardice, and an old enemy, whom he had once threatened with arrest, a hated “autonomist”, and was told that Aguinaldo had left for San Isidro in Tarlac." Could this sentence be clarified or broken down? dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The death of Luna, the most brilliant and capable of the Filipino generals at the time, was a decisive factor in the fight against the American forces." This statement needs a source, or it should be reworded. dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Luna-Cojuangco Affair

This section needs additional sources. Sources after the first, second, and second-to-last sentences would be helpful, in particular. dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More information on his near-death experience at the Battle of Santo Tomas could be included under "Philippine-American War". dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commemoration

I'll do a quick copyedit over this one, too; there are very few issues with it. dci | TALK 16:53, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Final review checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Problems regarding these criteria have been laid out in the review.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Additional citations would be helpful in various places; they have been listed in the review.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
More background info, as mentioned in the review, is needed to better clarify parts of the article.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Most pictures are great, and have no issues with the 6A criteria. However, the picture of Tomas Mascardo is listed as needing a review on Wikimedia Commons before it is used. I'm not worried about this in the least, as the picture itself is being used fairly and appropriately; it's just something to be aware of.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I am not passing the article as it currently stands due to the unchanged prose issues cited above. Please contact me if you have any questions about the decision at my talk page. dci | TALK 22:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]