Talk:First Cevallos expedition/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Eviolite (talk · contribs) 01:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll take a look at this one today or tomorrow. eviolite (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

General notes:

Sources look good, however as I do not have access to them I cannot verify facts/lack of copyvio; will assume good faith though.
"Cevallo" in the lead - is this a typo?
May wish to add modern context that Colonia del Sacramento is in modern-day Uruguay
What national writing style is this article in? I see -ise spellings, but miles and MDY dates.
The two links to "Undeclared war" seem like WP:EASTEREGG links as people may expect them to lead to undeclared war - suggest rewording to incorporate the name of the war as well for clarity.

Background:

Spanish colonization of the Americas is probably a better link for "American colonies" than Spanish Empire
"arrived near the Colonia del Sacramento" - remove "the"

Expedition:

Add {{convert}} for "one and a half miles"
Link Mortar (weapon)
Add a comma after "Brigadier General Vicente da Silva da Fonseca"
"led two columns" - what does this mean?
"Portuguese governor Eloy Madureira" - governor of what?

Aftermath:

Not a big deal, but is it possible for the first quote to be paraphrased? The specific wording doesn't seem too pertinent.

@Pepperoni8pizza: see the above notes. The article is very good and is pretty close to GA, just have a few comments/suggested changes, so I'm placing it on hold for now so you can make them. Thanks, eviolite (talk) 14:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pepperoni8pizza: Apologies but I have now taken a look at a copy of one of the books cited, specifically the Marley one, and I am pretty concerned about close paraphrasing. For example, I took a look at the "Siege of Colonia del Sacramento" section, and it is very similarly formatted and written as the source material, just with a few words swapped out, which is a copyright/plagiarism issue (see again the page on close paraphrasing.) As a result, and also since it's already been almost 7 days since I put the review on hold, I will unfortunately have to fail the nomination. You did very good work on the article but it needs to be reworded to fall into the guidelines for copyright violations. eviolite (talk) 03:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]