Talk:Chapultepec/GA1

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

Reviewer: MX (talk · contribs) 02:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)


 * After an issue is addressed, please strike the entire bullet point so I know it is done and can double-check. Thanks!

Review 1: Prose
Hello! I'll be reviewing this article. My review will consist of two parts: (1) prose/grammatical suggestions and (2) reviewing sources for accuracy and if they are reliable. Give me a few days. Thanks again to everyone who worked on this! MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 02:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)


 * – per WP:REALTIME, remove today. Preferably, add the year when the park was divided into three sections, if possible. Make sure that this year is cited in the body paragraphs.


 * - same here; perhaps add when the government started doing this.


 * – “in Mexico City” is fine


 * – when?


 * – since when?

Characteristics

 * – use convert template 686 ha


 * – great is WP:PEACOCK. How would you rephrase it? Perhaps you mean “largest”?


 * – when?

First section

 * - 274.03 ha


 * – 182 ha


 * – Run-on sentence, please rephrase.


 * – convert using 10000 m2


 * – WP:WEASEL, please rephrase


 * – as of when?


 * – convert template needed


 * – convert complete needed


 * – convert template needed


 * – convert template needed; BTW, which Aztec ruler?


 * – clarification needed. I do not understand this sentence.


 * – same here, conversion template needed


 * – I thought it said 1940 in the previous paragraphs; which one is it?

Second section

 * – convert template


 * – conversion template


 * – dominated is probably not the best word; consider rephrasing


 * – when?

Third section

 * – convert template


 * – convert template


 * – convert template

History

 * – Unsure what the last part means


 * No history for the past 7 years … there must have been something that occurred between 2010 and now.

Overall problems

 * There are many instances where the same information is repeated on more than one occasion in different parts of the article, particularly info from the Characteristics section, First section, and History. The Niños Héreos are mentioned multiple times, Los Pinos is mentioned multiple times, part of the park becoming the residence for heads of state is mentioned multiple times, the description of the trees are mentioned multiple times, remains found are mentioned, etc. This needs to be fixed/trimmed down. I'll have to go back and re-read the article. But the original editor(s) should know what I'm talking about. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 04:26, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Review 2: Sources

 * Fix the names of all the authors in the references. It should read Lastname, Firstname, not Firstname Lastname.


 * Please spell out all the acronyms in the sources (i.e. DDM → Diario de México)


 * Source 3 is dead. Please replace with this new source: The newspaper changed their URL format and it messed everything up.


 * Source 5 is dead. Please replace with this archived source:


 * Source 6 is dead (article leads to a blank page). Please replace with this archived source: . The author’s name also needs to be fixed.


 * Source 8 is dead. Please replace with this archived source:


 * Source 9 is officially dead. No archive exists of it. Please replace it with another, live source.


 * Source 10 is dead too. It links to the main page of the website, not to the article in question. Please find an alternative source.


 * Source 12 is dead. Please replace with this archived source:


 * Source 17 leads nowhere, which means it is dead. Please replace with archived source:


 * Source 18 is dead. Please replace with archived source:

I'll be checking for text-source accuracy and posting any issues, if found, below. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 04:49, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

UPDATE: I will wait till all archives are added before I check the source/text integrity. I worked on the WP:LEAD for now. There are several problems there. First, though leads do not need a source, the information there has to be cited elsewhere per WP:LEADCITE. The sentences I tagged were not found anywhere else, as far as I could tell after reading the intro. There are a few "when?" tags as well that need to be addressed since I suspect the article's info might be outdated. Now, once that is fixed, I want to propose another change. The first paragraph is great and introduces the article with information from the "Characteristics" section. But the second paragraph does not summarize the article well, and per WP:LEAD, it should include a general overview of the rest of the sections. I propose that the second paragraph of the lead covers more on the three sections of the park, and then wraps up with the later sections. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 14:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment on October 14 Updates - Thank you for adding sources. Please remember that references should be added with full templates (i.e. title, author, publisher, dates, etc.). Not just bare URLs. At the same time, the measurements need the convert template above, see Template:Convert. Manual changes may not be accurate and are strongly discouraged for these updates. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 14:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Result
After having this nomination opened for a week, I will have to close it as "failed". The issues were not addressed. I didn't get to discussing the title of the article. I believe the article should be titled "Chapultepec Park" as most sources refer to it as that. If this article is ever nominated for GA again, I request to be a second reviewer. MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 13:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)