Talk:1979 Salvadoran coup d'état/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 16:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * No DABs
 * Can you please clarify? I can't see a link that would need a disambiguation.
 * You are correct. The tool reports needed disambiguation links as DABs.


 * The license for File:ENWCiSqWoAEGa4w.jpg is incorrect. The putative author almost certainly did not take the photo and has no right to declare it his own work. You need to figure out where it was published and then figure out the appropriate license.
 * Removed it for now. I'll figure that out.


 * Licensing for the other photos is correct.
 * Ok.


 * The lede needs to be expanded and does not summarize the rest of the article.
 * Expanded


 * Many, many duplicate links. Only link once in the main body.
 * Working on that. Question: Is it acceptable to link something in the body that has already been linked in the infobox and/or lead section?
 * Yes.
 * Thank you. I think I got every duplicate link.
 * Good job; you'd only missed one which I went ahead and did for you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thank you.


 * The refugees overpopulated the already densely populated country and most of them lived in poverty and had to sustain themselves without any government assistance. awkward
 * Fixed to The refugees coming from Honduras overpopulated the already densely populated country. The refugees lived in poverty and had to sustain themselves without any government assistance.
 * You have a habit of using the exact same words in close proximity. Pronouns are your friends!
 * They are my friends. Also fixed.


 * The poor populace gave support to opposition candidates perhaps "the impoverished citizens supported opposition candidates"?
 * Suggestion taken.


 * Due to the increase in poor Salvadorans in the nation awkward
 * Fixed to The increase of impoverished Salvadorans in the nation allowed ...


 * President Romero crushed the strikes and marches with the use of live ammunition. Two things, only use a person's title on the first mention and the ammo didn't fire itself.
 * Fixed to President Romero's soldiers crushed the strikes and marches by firing live ammunition at the crowds.
 * Better, but perhaps "Romero's troops crushed the strikes and marches by using live ammunition on the protesters"? Remember don't use titles after the first mention.
 * Yea, I think that's better. Changed.


 * Do not use a person's first name after the first mention.
 * Fixed. Question: Does this include first name usage in the lead section?
 * Judgement call, but should acceptable to use it in both the lede and the main body, IMO.
 * Ok.


 * charged by the army of corruption of "with"
 * Changed


 * Link democratic socialism
 * Fixed


 * The junta itself was the source of mass murder, torture, executions and unexplained disappearances, utilizing their own death squads to do so. Awkward, rephrase
 * Split sentence and fixed
 * The junta itself was the source of human rights violations such as mass murder, torture, executions, and unexplained disappearances. Despite dissolving ORDEN, the junta utilized its own death squads to commit the human rights violations. Proximity alert on "human rights violations". Perhaps atrocities or something similar?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Suggestion taken
 * I meant for you to use both atrocities and human rights violations, or some other similar term, because you used the same word of phrase in two consecutive sentences.
 * Fixed


 * According to the memoirs of Colonel Gutiérrez Avendaño, the coup was postponed three times and President Romero had found out about the conspiracy but failed to take any serious action to prevent it. No single-sentence paragraphs; integrate it into the narrative and rephrase the awkward language.
 * Integrated into the second paragraph of Prelude and planning. Sentence split.


 * Mere approval does not constitute active participation in the coup.
 * Fixed


 * Be consistent in date formats in your sources.
 * Fixed


 * Be sure to italicize book titles and use page numbers where appropriate in your sources.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Dates look to be consistent except for #45.
 * Books need page numbers
 * Be consistent about putting book and article titles in title case or not.
 * I went through every citation and I think I got everything to be consistent. If there are differences, it may be because I used cite book, cite journal, and cite web.--Pizzaking13 (talk) 23:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)


 * The cites for #35–37 are incomplete.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Expanded the cites
 * Fixed --Pizzaking13 (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll look read through it again once you've made these changes.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:31, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I got everything you suggested noted and fixed. I also went through the page and fixed grammatical errors, clarified a few things, and used more pronouns. I might add some categories later but aside from that these suggestions are done. --Pizzaking13 (talk) 2:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Italicization looks OK, but you forgot about being consistent with book and article titles; some are in title case, some are not.
 * Page ranges are very large, which will make things harder for readers to find. Especially the 200 pages in #13! You really should have nothing exceeding 10 pages or so. Not required here, but for your next article I'd suggest that you use some form of short citation format with all of your sources in a bibliography and the cites, with more exact page ranges, in their own section. So you could have multiple cites to a source, but each with the page number(s) applying that that specific fact or whatever. It's a little bit of a PitA to convert from what you have now to that format if you have to upgrade an existing article, but I think that it's worthwhile to do so.
 * Some books are still missing page ranges, forex #26, 30, 32.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Got it. There are 4 other coups that need pages so I'll be sure to take this advice and come back to this one and the other 2 coup pages I've made to fix the citations. Also, #26 is a website with 1 page so it doesn't need a page number.--Pizzaking13 (talk) 21:49, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oops. I think that the only remaining titles in sentence case are #30 and 32, but there may be others.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 30 and 32 were fine when I checked them but I caught 39 and fixed it.--Pizzaking13 (talk) 22:39, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Nope. Like this: Title case.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh that's what you meant. Should be good now. Would web article titles also be written in title case or does that just apply to book and journal titles?--Pizzaking13 (talk) 23:17, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * All English-language article titles should be in title case, if that's what you want to use. Key point is to be consistent.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:33, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I went back and edited the titles. I think they should all be consistent now.--Pizzaking13 (talk) 00:10, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but you also did Spanish-language titles as well. I don't read Spanish so I don't know the rules capitalizing titles, but you should follow them instead of the English-language rules. You missed a couple of words in the subtitles that I fixed for you. One more thing, Subtitles are always capitalized just as if they were a regular title, so the first word is always capitalized, etc. Promoting now.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:34, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I checked and in Spanish only the first word and proper nouns are capitalized so I changed that. Thank you for reviewing this article!--Pizzaking13 (talk) 01:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)