Talk:San Juan, Puerto Rico/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

Reviewer: --Malleus Fatuorum 02:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History

That Lieutenant Teofilo Marxuach was responsible for the first bullet shot by the American military during World War I needs to be cited to a reliable source.Done Tony the Marine (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"In May 1898, United States Navy ships ... bombed San Juan". How do ships deliver bombs? Should this be "shelled"? Done Tony the Marine (talk) 03:06, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Because of the rich transports ...". Should this be "rich cargoes"?
- That's the idea. Reworded. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

"The majority San Juan's water territory is composed of ...". Doesn't make sense.
- Simplified the sentence. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Districts

"municipio of Río Piedras". Is that really what it was called? Municipio of?
- No, it was Municipio de Río Piedras. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"East of Old San Juan lies the upscale tourist-oriented neighborhood of Condado ...". What does "upscale" mean? Up-market?
- That is just a fancy word for "wealthy" or "high class". Corrected. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics.

Needs to be cited.

Tourism

"On January 23, 1984 both of these edifications were catalogued as being part of humanity's cultural patrimony." I guess this was means to say "edifices" rather than "edifications"?
- Yup. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Culture

Is Ref #38 meant to source everything in the first paragraph? As it's one of the broken links it's difficult to check.

Government

Needs to be cited

Safety

Needs to be cited.

Education

The last paragraph needs to be cited, particularly this claim: "Most of Puerto Rico's best private schools are located in San Juan".
- Yeah, that bit was clearly POV. There are first-class schools all over Puerto Rico, trying to establish which ones are the best is not our work. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:53, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation

The first paragraph needs to be cited, particularly this claim: "The Port of San Juan is the fourth busiest seaport in the Western Hemisphere".

Health and utilities

Needs to be cited

There's nothing about utilities in this section, or elsewhere in the article that I can see.

Sports

The first paragraph needs to be cited.

What is the source for the Professional teams table?
- I have updated the current teams and sourced them individually. - Caribbean~H.Q. 20:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also

What's the relevance of including lists of national capitals here?
- Due to puerto Rico's "limbo" status, I prefer not to remove these. - Caribbean~H.Q. 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

There are at least six dead links.[1]

One link is flagged as spam.

Microsoft's Encarta is cited eight times, and the Encyclopedia Britannica once; general encyclopedias are not suitable sources for another general encyclopedia like wikipedia. Reliable secondary sources need to be found.

Citation #22 needs to be fixed.

Full details including publisher and last access dates need to be given for all citations. See #24, 29, and 46, for instance.

I see, there is a combination of inexperience and decay in this old GA. This may not be the best time of the year to deal with it, but I should be able to work with the issues throughout the next week. - Caribbean~H.Q. 03:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for picking up the torch. There's no desperate rush with this though, particularly given the busy time of year. If it's being worked on I'm happy to leave it for as long as it takes. --Malleus Fatuorum 04:41, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wew, I'm finally back. Work on the article will begin on January 3, after some delayed archiving and cleaup takes place. Regards, - Caribbean~H.Q. 08:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How are we doing with this?

This review has been ongoing for two months now, so I think it's about time we thought about closing it. Quite a few of the issues raised above remain to be dealt with. Can they all be fixed within the next week? --Malleus Fatuorum 14:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)--Malleus Fatuorum 14:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If there's still a sizeable amount left to do then delist; if it's just a bit I can try to fix what's left. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 17:35, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This review was opened over two months ago now, but many of the issues raised above remain outstanding. So I'm going to close this now and delist the article. The work that still needs to be done is best tackled without the time pressure of a GA review. --Malleus Fatuorum 18:06, 20 February 2010 (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.