Talk:Giosue Gallucci/GA1

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

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 12:40, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Grabbing this for a review shortly. Miyagawa (talk) 12:40, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Ok, let's get this review started!


 * No dab links.
 * Citations - the names of the newspapers should be in italics, and add the page numbers since you have the information available. If you have the issue numbers around as well on another page then add those too. Authors too if the articles list them. ✅ I added the pages when available; author names were not available.
 * On a related note - you might want to go to Newspapers.com and sign up for free account (I've got one and it is very useful) - I'm sure you'll find all the details on there about those articles and I'm sure lots more too.
 * Gangrule.com - What makes this one a reliable source? Also, add an access date and the author's details for each cite that uses it. ✅ See Sources.
 * Running the external links through the checker threw something up. Citation #8 needs to have "|registration=yes" added to it, so that it shows after the cite. Further information available at Template:Registration required. ✅
 * Cite #41 - again, what makes this one a reliable source, particularly as it may fall foul of the WP:USERGENERATED policy.
 * True, it is from a blog and may be problematic. However, since it is only used in a specific section about trivia, I think it is permissible in this particular case. DonCalo (talk) 11:55, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Images are good - a couple of them aren't particularly verbose in their licence descriptions, but the general copyright is correct (in that it has expired).
 * The lead will need to be expanded a little I think - certainly at first glance it doesn't mention the information in either the Assassination or the Death of his brother subsections at all. But let's leave that to one side for the moment and we'll come back to it after everything else has been sorted. ✅ I expanded the lead somewhat, mentioning the most important events according to WP:LEAD.
 * Change "Naples (Italy) to "Naples, Italy," ✅
 * Also specify the exact date he was born as you have it - otherwise it makes it look like your maths are wrong in the following sentence. ✅ See the infobox
 * Change Rotterdam (The Netherlands) to Rotterdam, the Netherlands. ✅
 * You're going to need to explain camorristi for those unfamiliar with it. ✅
 * Change "He was arrested while operating a fruit wagon" to "This took place while he was operating a fruit wagon..." just to avoid the repetition of arrested. ✅
 * I've got a feeling that "lesion" was probably a mistranslation at the time as the Italian is similar to the latin which simply means injury. So the Italians probably meant assaulting people rather than something as the result of a disease. But leave it in, as it's a quote so going about hypothesising only leads to original research. ✅
 * You can link to some of those offences the first time they appear in the body of the article, particulary attempted murder, manslaughter, blackmail, theft although leave out the lesion as I don't think the article on that is particularly relevant. ✅
 * "His brother Vincenzo was murdered in New York on November 20, 1898," - New York City or New York State? ✅
 * Link East Harlem ✅
 * The first sentence of Political influence is a bit of a run-on one, can it be split into two? ✅
 * Third paragraph of Political influence - is that Cotillo or Gallucci? ✅
 * "Gallucci left behind only SD 3,402" - should be USD. ✅
 * I'd make In popular culture a subsection of Burial and legacy and I think it fits within the legacy part of that, but I can see why you'd still want it as a separate section. ❌ Better to keep it as a separate section, also because of the reference.


 * Once you've had a chance to look at those, and perhaps take a first glance at expanding the lead to summarise the parts of the article it doesn't currently mention then ping me and I'll come back and take another look. Miyagawa (talk) 11:03, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm a couple of hours early from the seven day mark, but since there has been no movement on anything since the review was completed I think I'm safe to close. Hopefully someone will come back to the article in the future and go through the points above and re-nominate. Miyagawa (talk) 08:37, 18 March 2016 (UTC)