Talk:Julio and Marisol

Julio and Marisol has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 18, 2021. (Reviewed version).

AIDS High‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject AIDS, an attempt to build a comprehensive, detailed, and accessible guide to AIDS, HIV, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.AIDSWikipedia:WikiProject AIDSTemplate:WikiProject AIDSAIDS articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing an infobox.

Marketing & Advertising High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing 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.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Sexology and sexuality High‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Julio and Marisol appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 February 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Marisol loves Julio, but not enough to die for him?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/February. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Julio and Marisol.

Wikipedia

Julio and Marisol (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 25 March 2021 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

What needs improving?

@Awkwafaba: you rated this C class. I'd like to work on it more; can you give me some specific suggestions of things you found that needed improving? Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:11, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith: sorry for the slow reply. I think other than adding an infobox, maybe put it up for a Good Article Review and you’ll get a lot of good advice. The work you’ve done so far is great. Thanks for your work! --awkwafaba (📥) 02:55, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Julio and Marisol/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Some Dude From North Carolina (talk · contribs) 14:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm going to be reviewing this article. Expect comments by the end of the week. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 14:32, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Basic stuff and comments

Non-free use rationale looks good.
"Story line" should be "Storyline"
"which ran" → "that ran"
Always [re]cite sources for quotes.
"she's" → "she is" (MOS:CONTRACTIONS)
Remove the comma after "told Julio".
Remove the comma after "another day".
"a HIV counselor" → "an HIV counselor"
"a HIV test" → "an HIV test"
"late 1980's" → "late 1980s"
"Use of condoms" → "The use of condoms"
a "HIV melodrama" → an "HIV melodrama"
Remove the comma after "returned in 1997".

Done with all that ~~(except for making sure all the quotes are properly cited)~~ got those now.

Sources

Avoid using quotation marks in citations (WP:QWQ).

I'm not seeing any places I did this incorrectly. Could you be more specific?

Fixed Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add the "use mdy dates" template to fix citations (WP:BADDATE).

Done

Mark references from Los Angeles Times with "|url-access=limited".
Mark references from New York Magazine with "|url-access=subscription".
Mark references from The New York Times with "|url-access=limited".
Mark references from The Washington Post with "|url-access=limited".

Added all those

Newspaper.com sources should link to a clipping, not the newspaper title.

Hmmm, my newspapers.com subscription seems to have expired. I'll get back to you when I've got that sorted out.

Added a link. Some Dude From North Carolina (talk) 22:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Optional, but try archiving sources (you can use this tool).

Done. I hadn't known about that tool. Very nice!

@Some Dude From North Carolina: OK, I think I've got everything. I would be remiss if I didn't acknowledge the assistance of HumanxAnthro, whose extensive peer review comments were invaluable for me getting this into shape. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:10, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Progress

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 (references): 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, 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:
· · ·