Talk:Paulina de la Mora/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 23:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it is okay with you, I would like to review this. I always love reading articles on fictional characters, and I am intrigued by how there are separate sections for the character's voice and fashion. Makes me interested in learning more about the character. Aoba47 (talk) 23:10, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

I do not think the fictional character link is necessary, especially since there are already a few links in the sentence. I have been told in the past that this link is unnecessary so I am passing the note along to you.
For this part, (she manages both her parents' businesses), would it be beneficial to clarify what these two businesses are?
For this part, (married to José María Riquelme before she transitioned), I think a link to the transitioning (transgender) article would be helpful.
For this sentence, (The character is notable for her distinctive style of speech and for near-universal acclaim.), is the second "for" necessary?
For this part, (Suárez has received a Best Actress award for the role), I would clarify that this was for the Platino Awards.
While I do not think references/citations in the lead are necessary, it makes sense in this context as this kind of information can be contentious so having it cited right away would avoid misinterpretation or disagreements.
Since there is an entire section devoted to the character's fashion, should it be mentioned in some way in the lead?
I would add ALT text to the infobox image.

I hope this review is helpful so far. I will be going through the article section-by-section to make sure I get to everything and give it the appropriate time and attention. Feel free to either address my comments as I put them up or wait until the full review is up. I am aiming to complete the full review over the next two to three days. Aoba47 (talk) 23:22, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Development

For this part, (who plays Paulina), I would use the character's full name since it is the first time she is mentioned in the article.
For the first sentence, would it be possible to clarify exactly how many of Manolo Caro's projects she had worked on? I am just curious after reading the "frequent collaborator" part.
For this part (and in 2019 Vogue), there should be a comma between "2019" and "Vogue".
Did Castro ever provide a reason for her exit from the show? I am just curious because the "overshadowed" speculation is included here. Aoba47 (talk) 23:28, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Characterization

Please add ALT text for the image. The caption should also have a period because it is a full sentence.
For the following part, (for this reason he quickly wrote Suárez a very different role in their 2018 film), I would add a comma between "reason" and "he".
I am uncertain about the word "critiqued" in this context: (which has been critiqued as a perfect fit for the style of the show). While positive criticism is a thing, I more so associate the word with some sort of negative connotation. I think a different word choice would be better.
For the first sentence of the third paragraph, I think it may be better to say the following, Paulina is a bisexual feminist, with both citations moved to the end. I am suggesting this to avoid having one citation interrupt the flow of a rather short sentence. I think the change would help with readability.
For the sentence on Elle Woods, Cher Horowitz, and Hilary Banks, I think it looks a little odd to only have one of the character's works mentioned in the prose. I would either do the same for Woods and Horowitz or just use the Banks link which redirects to The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air already.

Voice

I would avoid a one-sentence paragraph when possible.
Please complete the "Media date and Non-free use rationale" boxes for the audio sample.
This is more of a clarification question, but were Paulina's earlier scenes completely re-shot to keep the voice consistent or was it done through a process similar to automated dialog replacement?
Apologies, but I have another clarification question. Was this backstory for Paulina's voice ever used in the show, or was it just created for the writers, directors, and actors to get a better feel for the character?
Make sure the citations are in numeric order.
I do not think "described" is the best word choice in this context: (She initially described Netflix restricting her from using the voice). I would go for something like "said" instead.
For the Paul Julian Smith sentence, I do not think "also" is necessary.
I do not the quote is necessary in this part, (says that she is "addicted to Tafil"), and I think it can be paraphrased to something like: (says that she has an addiction to it). I am also recommending this to avoid repeating Tafil twice in the same sentence.
For this part, (However, the BBC notes that the character's voice), I believe it should be noted. There are a few inconsistencies in this section where present and past tenses are used for publications so I would look over the entire article and be consistent with one way or the other. I've generally seen past tense more often used in Wikipedia articles.
For this part, (suggesting that it could be used as part of the show's socio-economic commentary), I would use "socioeconomic" as that is the spelling I have seen most often.
Does Pablo Raimondi elaborate on how a style of diction can indicate a person is a "daddy's girl" and someone who knows people's secrets? I am just curious because these are not things I typically attribute to a person's diction.
For this part, (a video of Paulina leaving a threatening voicemail for Diego), I would use Diego's full name and add some sort of descriptive phrase to let unfamiliar readers like myself understand who the character is.
For the final paragraph, I would use "season two" rather than "season 2" as it is more common to spell out numerals less than ten (unless they are a part of a date for obvious reasons). Aoba47 (talk) 03:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fashion

I have been advised in the past to avoid short, one-word quotes like "fabulous" as it is rather generic and quotes should be reserved for something more important and informative. I paraphrase this.
For this sentence, (They said that her fashion had an impact on viewers and that she first stole the show in episode one because of her unusual pink outfit.), it is not clear who the "she" is referring to.
What is "the review" mentioned in this sentence: (The review notes that a lot of Paulina's outfits are more the style of a working woman, in plain and neutral colors and with lots of blazers.)?
Who is the "they" being referenced in the beginning of this sentence: ( They add that while her clothes are loose, they have a feminine cut, and that she wears flat shoes on all but one occasion.)?
For this part, (when Paulina dressed in blouses and shirts they were always buttoned all), I would add a comma between "shirts" and "they.
I am a little confused by this wording, (often wore pants that end at the waist). Pants that end at the waist would be very short indeed. Maybe "start at the waist" would be better. Aoba47 (talk) 03:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Appearances

I think for this part, (keeping all of her father's, Ernesto's, dirty secrets), it should be "her father Ernesto's dirty secrets" instead.
For this part, (and works hardest to get him out), I believe it should be "the hardest" rather than just "hardest".
I would use characters' full names when you first reference them. It is not necessary for a family member like Ernesto since it is already clear what their last name is, but I would use the full names for characters like María José and Dr. Cohén.
The phrase "gets given" sounds like a little off in this part: (gets given the final amount of money).
I am confused by this part, (The florists' anniversary party still goes ahead), since this is the first time the anniversary party is discussed in the article, and from the "still" wording, it sounds like it was an important story point that was referenced earlier in the show.
Clarification question, but do we know how Virginia died?
I was a little confused by this part, (she wants to buy back the florists), because I was unaware until this point that they lost their family business.
It may be helpful to add some more links to this section. Things like florists', Catalan, and white-collar crime could be good examples of this.
For this part, (for prostitution, to raise money more), I do not think the comma is needed.
The "picks back up straight away" wording seems too informal for Wikipedia to me.
For this part, (especially when Kim turns out to be manipulative), I'd clarify what proves that is "manipulative".
For this part, (Purificación is committed to hospital), I think it should be "a hospital", and I would also clarify why she is committed to a hospital.
For this part, (about dictatorial grandma Victoria), I would put "their" between "about" and "dictatorial".
I have a question for this part: ( but she is pushed down the stairs). Who pushes Victoria down the stairs? Also, why did she try to murder the family maid? Aoba47 (talk) 20:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Critical response

For the final sentence of the third paragraph, I do not think you need to repeat the same citation twice.

Awards

Everything looks good here.

Notes

For the first note, I'd rearrange the citations to be in numeric order.

Final comments

Great work with the article. I will be more than happy to promote it once the comments are addressed. Have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 21:50, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Thank you for the thorough review, I believe I've addressed everything. Kingsif (talk) 00:05, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing everything. I will ✓ Pass this a good article. Have a great start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 04:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.