Talk:Lolita Lebrón/GA1

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

Good article nomination on hold
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of August 9, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:


 * 1. Well written?: Written in a clear and understandable manner - however the WP:LEAD could be expanded a bit, and broken apart into 2 or 3 shorter paragraphs.
 * 2. Factually accurate?: Duly cited to WP:RS/WP:V sources throughout.
 * 3. Broad in coverage?: Good structure, covering many aspects of the individual's life.
 * 4. Neutral point of view?: Appears to be written in a neutrally worded manner.
 * 5. Article stability? There seems to have been a disagreement on the talk page recently, as well as a little bit of edit-warring in the edit history - has this been resolved to an amicable solution?
 * 6. Images?: Failing at this point in time - Images do not have detailed fair-use rationales given on the image pages, all aspects of the fair use rationale should be filled out and explained in more detail, at this point sections are missing.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. Cirt (talk) 15:01, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review. I filled the fields of one of the images and removed the other, if there's something missing let me know. I believe the disagreement in the talk page was resolved by Tony; the reverts weren't edit warring per se, the information added was being sourced by using a newspaper's digital archive, which can't be assessed without paying a fee, thus failing verifiability. I discussed the issue with the user and he provided the article's text as can be seen in the talk page, I believe there is no ongoing conflict. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  19:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * ✅ Passed. Thanks for the quick response. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 19:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)