Talk:Julio Aparicio Díaz/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AJona1992 (talk · contribs) 21:12, 20 December 2011 (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): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
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, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Aparicio made his public début in - this is English Wikipedia not Spanish Wikipedia "début" --> "debut"
"He was confirmed as a torero, or matador, in 1994" - what does this statement mean?
"Aparicio is most famous for an incident" - "most famous for" is a WP:WEASEL word and is POV-ish
There are far too many redlinks, consider cleaning these up
Most if not all sources are not consistent with each other and are missing author(s), publishers, etc
Why is there a picture of Diaz in the references section?
After fixing these concerns, (1) please expand the article to its fullest potential (2) request a peer review (3) get the article copy-edited (4) read and re-read the criteria for a good article (5) nominate the article again. Best, Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 21:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]