Talk:María Santos Gorrostieta Salazar

DYK nomination

This article has been nominated for DYK. To review or comment, go here. ComputerJA (talk) 00:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

María Santos Gorrostieta Salazar

really nice work. i have one question - some sources say her first husband was a mayor as well... did you find this to be true? i also couldn't find anything about her work as a physician. Decora (talk) 05:11, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• Yes, José Sánchez Chávez was the mayor before his wife. It says that he was the "anterior alcalde" ('previous mayor'). I'll add the information.

Some Mexican sources say that the guy was believed to have ties with organized crime... I'm not sure if I should add that information because it might be pushing for speculation. Maybe when some arrests are made new information will come out. ComputerJA (talk) 06:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

thanks for clarifying. i think an English source mentioned that speculation too... it was the LA Times link. but i would like to know more about this before writing about it - for example, who exactly was claiming this? I don't see much info out there. Some English sources are also reporting her second husband has gone missing. Decora (talk) 07:02, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

According to El Universal, after the attack on the couple in January 2010, Sánchez Chávez reportedly "knew exactly where the threats were coming from."[1] This other article, which is boring and hard to read even for me, implies that his husband and his brother had ties with one of the two cartels in the state. I'll see what I can do to take care of this. This article is about María Santos, not about his husband. I don't want to start drawing the dots myself ... I'll wait for the police to draw them first (if they ever do). That's just me, but do you think we should include the information?

As for his second husband, he [Nereo Patiño Delgado] and María Santos had separated 15 days before the attack, but he was called in to declare already. [2] The source does not say if he is a suspect, however. ComputerJA (talk) 09:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the information, i appreciate it. i dont really think its worth it to include it because it is too vague - what does "has ties" mean? the LA times implies that Maria had to deal with accusations against accusations about her husband - did she? is there a quote anywhere of her doing that? i havent found one. having come off the Alistair McAlpine article i have become very cautious about including anything even remotely speculative in a biography - i prefer to wait until several news outlets have confirmed something. people have too many agendas and is too easy to get mislead. thanks again. Decora (talk) 23:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

• Sounds good to me. I feel the same way. Thanks for the help. ComputerJA (talk) 01:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:María Santos Gorrostieta Salazar/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Diannaa (talk · contribs) 12:23, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi ComputerJA. I will be performing the GA review. I have taken the liberty of perfoming some copy edits while reviewing the article. Here's some questions requiring your attention from my read-through:

• Wording in the lead "During her tenure as mayor, Gorrostieta Salazar survived three assassination attempts, but that did not stop her from openly declaring her defiance against organized crime" could be improved. How about "In spite of three failed assassination attempts during her tenure as mayor, Gorrostieta Salazar continued to be outspoken in the fight against organized crime."

•  Done

• Sinaloa Cartel is mentioned in the lead, but nowhere in the article. Either remove this from the lead or add something about it in the body of the article.

•  Done I have no idea why I wrote the Sinaloa Cartel. Facepalm

• In the "Career" section you state that three assassination attempts left her hospitalised. This implies that all three attempts led to hospitalisation, but in the detailed descriptions of the events it states that the first attempt did not result in serious injuries. Were they hospitalised in the first attempt? Please make sure the information presented the "Career" section agrees with the information presented further down.

•  Done

• "Both of them married and eventually separated after facing marital problems." What does this mean? It's not clear.

•  Done Source says she decided to separate later on.

• The last two sentences of the "Career" section seem misplaced, as they are not related to her marriages. Please move them.

•  Done I placed them in the second paragraph, when it talks about her political career. Hope this is fine.

• The Daily Mail is not considered a reliable source. Please ensure that any content sourced only to this paper is removed. In particular, they appear to be the only source to report that her body had been stabbed and burned.

•  Done I removed the stabbed and burned part and the source altogether.

• I don't think it's important to know that the state of Michoacán is in the western part of Mexico, or that the town of Tiquicheo is in the southern part of that state, so I took these details out. Please re-add if there's some significance to these facts that I'm not aware of.

•  Done That's fine with me.

• ... a lucrative smuggling route for narcotics heading towards the United States This needs to be re-worded. How about "a lucrative route for smugglers taking narcotics into the United States"

•  Done

• The drug cartels ... often target mayors due to their infiltration in the Mexican political system I think what you are trying to say here is that mayors are targeted when they try to use their position to fight crime. "Infiltrate" is definitely the wrong word. How about this: "often target mayors who use their position in the political system to fight crime"

•  Done I think I clarified what the source was trying to say. Feel free to let me know if it is unclear.

• Mexican drug war, Michoacán, Tiquicheo, and Mexico are linked multiple times; please link these terms once in the lead (if it occurs there) and once in the body.

•  Done

• Political parties Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) and Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) are linked multiple times. Please link once in the lead and once in the body. Please use the abbreviations for all mentions in the body, except the first.

•  Done

• The body says "perhaps even more than 100,000" were killed, but the explanatory note says "nearly 100,000 victims". This information should be consistent in the two places.

•  Done ... more of my dumb mistakes.

• His successor, Enrique Peña Nieto, has pledged to reduce the violence by readjusting the security strategy of Calderón. I had to look at the source to find out what this means. How about this: "His successor, Enrique Peña Nieto, has pledged to continue the fight, but plans to adjust the strategy to reduce the level of violence"

•  Done

• Is it important to know that Gorrostieta Salazar's brother, Benigno Gorrostieta Salazar, was the driver of the vehicle on 23 January 2010? It seems too much detail, and its removal would let the sentence flow better.

•  Done

• Magazine title Contacto Ciudadano should be in italics.

•  Done

• The funeral section needs to be re-worded to put it in the past tense.

•  Done

• The "see also" section is redundant because the listed article is already linked in the body.

•  Done

• Is there any information available on other initiatives she pursued as mayor? This would be a great addition to the article if any material can be found.

• I agree, but I haven't found any sources talking about other initiatives she wanted to pursue in office.

• The template {{Spanish name}} might be a useful addition. -- Dianna (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

•  Done

Thanks for the thorough review! Feel free to let me know if other concerns need to be addressed. I'll add this page to my Watchlist. Cheers! ComputerJA (talk) 03:47, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Final checks

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

   All concerns were promptly addressed by the nominator. I have done two rounds of copy editing and feel the prose meets the GA standard.

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   A. Provides references to all sources:

   Citations are neatly organised with citation templates. All material is sourced. No dead links were found, as most of the citations have archive links.

   B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   Sources are reliable and spot checks revealed no copyright violations or too-close paraphrasing.

   C. No original research:

   Sources backed up the content presented in the article, with no original research found.

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

   A few extraneous details were removed during the course of the review.

3. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy?

   Fair representation without bias:

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   One correctly templated fair-use image is present in the info box.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Congratulations! the article is promoted to GA. -- Dianna (talk) 22:33, 15 April 2013 (UTC)