Talk:Palacio Municipal de Caracas/GA1

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

Reviewer: Moswento (talk · contribs) 14:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello! I'll review this one. Will get to it as soon as I can! Moswento talky 14:37, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

(Pinging @User:Ipigott as an interested editor)

Sadly, I'm going to have to fail this article this time round, as it would need a fairly extensive re-write to meet the GA criteria. A lot of good work has been done in creating an broad article, especially given the paucity of English sources, and once the issues below are addressed, it would definitely be worth re-nominating it. In fact, just drop me a note and I'll put it at the top of my review list if you want to nominate it again. Keep up the good work! Moswento talky 07:56, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Prose
 * The 'History' section at the moment is confusingly structured, as it jumps about chronologically. It seems to go forward in time, but then jumps back to 1811, and then to 1809.
 * The prose generally could do with some polishing. What does it mean, for example, to be "the focal point for the Constitutional Convention"? As another example, it currently reads as if it is the Declaration that was known as the "cradle of independence" rather than the chapel.
 * The first three sentences of the 'Museum' section are disjointed at the moment. This may have arisen from multiple editors working on the same text. Each sentence seems to have been written independently, without reference to the others. You also introduce Santana, but don't explain who he is until the end of the section.

I have concerns with the following sources being used:
 * Sources
 * EcuRed (FN1) is a wiki whose editors are selected on the basis of political affiliation rather than academic rigour.
 * The Dillon book (FN10) is published by iUniverse, a self-publishing company.
 * "Nuestra Histórica Caracas." (FN9) is a self-published blog
 * "Óleos y Música" (FN13) is also a self-published blog.


 * Coverage
 * At points in this article, quite a lot of information is assumed of the reader. A bit more context, and a few more wikilinks, would be helpful here. E.g. Who is Bolivar? When was the Constitutional Convention? What is the "the installation of the de la Academia de Matemáticas, and operation of the Cabildo de Caracas"? Why was Bolivar storming city hall in 1809?
 * Overall, the article seems to cover the major aspects of the topic, but it might be worth looking into whether there is more to say about interior architecture and the present governmental function of the building

I agree that it's not even close. None of our group would have nominated it. Thanks for the pointers anyway.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:27, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Review follow-up
Is anyone interested in taking this further? I certainly feel the constructive comments from the reviewer should be addressed but I don't want to be the only contributor. I'll wait a day or two for reactions.--Ipigott (talk) 08:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Not really, I can think of more worthy candidates of our past articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:28, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Then I'll try to sort some of the problems out myself. After all, if a reviewer has spent time on coming up with recommendations, the least we can do is make use of his recommendations. As they are quite specific, they should not be difficult to implement. Chacun à son goût! (which I once saw translated, before the days of Google, as "Everyone has his gout").--Ipigott (talk) 16:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, it is Latin America which badly needs GAs so if you make the effort so will I..♦ Dr. Blofeld  19:53, 10 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Just to say - don't feel like you need to make the effort on my account. I won't be bothered if nothing comes of my review at this point - I understand the article was not nommed by those who had worked on it. Moswento talky 07:38, 11 September 2013 (UTC)