Talk:Sentencia Arbitral de Guadalupe

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sentencia Arbitral de Guadalupe article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spain Low‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Maintenance tags

@Spasage: Can you explain your thoughts and justification regarding the recently added tags {{copy edit}} and {{sections}}? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 06:51, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mathglot:I see three issues. One is it can be broken down into section. Which makes reading article easy. Second, It only has one reference. Multiple reference are always good. Third, once it is broken down into section, copy editing can be done. I hope it clarify. Tags are there to improve article.--Spasage (talk) 14:33, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Spasage: I didn't ask about the {{one source}} tag, because I agree with you that a lot more references are needed. As far as the two tags I did ask about, your response doesn't completely clarify; could you elaborate?

Regarding sections: the article is essentially a stub, consisting of six short paragraphs. Although this is longer than the maximum of four paragraphs recommended at WP:LEAD, one of the paragraphs consists of only one sentence, and two others of only two. Plenty of articles have leads longer than this entire article. Nevertheless, if you believe that sections would help readability, I'm not opposed; could you suggest what sections you were thinking of?

The {{copy edit}} tag calls for improvements in grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. Honestly, I see little room for improvement there, as the article is currently constituted. If you can you point me to any specific errors of grammar, style or spelling that you found, I'll be happy to fix them. Ditto if you perceive problems in cohesion or tone. If you can't, then I don't know what that tag is doing there. Mathglot (talk) 18:17, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are satisfy with copy editing, you can remove that tag, but for other two, they should stay. This article should be divided into sections.--Spasage (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]