Talk:Regina Martínez Pérez/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 22:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC) Hello there! I'll field this one if it's okay by you, I know you've had to wait almost a month now, so I'll try and get this done fairly quickly. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:45, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine with me. Take as long as you need to. Thanks for the review! ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 22:54, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All in all, you've done a thoroughly good job. My main concern is with the prose; there are quite a few little problems here and there. More generally, the text could be tighter and more precise, but this is a problem better dealt with at Peer Review rather than here at GA. Fix the few problems I have highlighted, and this should be an easy pass. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:22, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Few spelling errors, such as "newsmagazine"; surely this should be "news magazine" ? "relocated in" should be "relocated to". Sentences like "But moving back to Veracruz entailed its own challenges" don't fit particularly well with the Wikipedia prose stylings, I would suggest altering or removing them, thereby sticking to more strictly factual statements. Don't start sentences with "But". Done Thanks. I removed it and put "In Veracruz" instead. "Her parents María Lorenza Pérez Vázquez and Florencio Martínez Romero had..." would be better broken up with commas. "Since a young age..." should be "From a young age...". Why only mention the TV station's name at the end of this paragraph ? Done You're right ... Facepalm "who running for office" should be "who were running for office." "who arrested with" should be "who was arrested with". "outweighed" should be "outweigh". "retracted from his confession" should be "retracted his confession". What do you mean when you say "roughly any arrests"? Done I removed "roughly any" and replaced it with "few." Hope this clarifies it. Read through the whole text again, there are definite improvements to be made. If you want to take this on to FA, take it for a Peer Review first, as it needs a good copy-edit from a fluent English speaker. Not sure if I can do FA because my English isn't quite there yet. I placed the article on peer review, though (see Wikipedia:Peer review/Regina Martínez Pérez/archive1).
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	See above.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	"When Mexico experienced its transition to democracy in 2000..." I'm no expert in Mexican political history, but this seems like a controversial statement to be making, and it only has one reference to support it. The concept of "democracy" is relative and subjective, so I'd have to question as to whether this statement breaches out NPOV policy ? I tweaked it to "Although Mexico's PRI lost the presidencial seat after 71 years in power in 2000, some states across the country remained under the rule of PRI politicians." Hope this is fine. Much better! Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass! Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the review. I just addressed all of your concerns. I also added Regina's article to the Peer Review. Wikipedia:Peer review/Regina Martínez Pérez/archive1. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 00:27, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right; this one's a clear pass! Many thanks for contributing, and all the best! Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:16, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]