Talk:Julio Aparicio Díaz/GA1

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

Reviewer: AJona1992 (talk · contribs) 21:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * Aparicio made his public début in - this is English Wikipedia not Spanish Wikipedia "début" --> "debut"
 * "He was confirmed as a torero, or matador, in 1994" - what does this statement mean?
 * "Aparicio is most famous for an incident" - "most famous for" is a WP:WEASEL word and is POV-ish
 * There are far too many redlinks, consider cleaning these up
 * Most if not all sources are not consistent with each other and are missing author(s), publishers, etc
 * Why is there a picture of Diaz in the references section?
 * After fixing these concerns, (1) please expand the article to its fullest potential (2) request a peer review (3) get the article copy-edited (4) read and re-read the criteria for a good article (5) nominate the article again. Best, Jona yo!  Selena 4 ever  21:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)