Talk:Espanto II

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Espanto II/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wugapodes (talk · contribs) 23:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Note This review is part of a series of reviews by an editor on articles of a similar topic. Because of this, the various reviews may reference each other. Please also see Los Espantos, Espanto I, Espanto II, Espanto III, Espanto IV and V, Espanto Jr., Espanto Jr. (CMLL), and Los Hijos del Espanto if things are unclear. Disclosure: Both the nom and reviewer are participating in the WikiCup, if need be, anyone may request a second opinion if they feel my review is not following the GA criteria. Thanks. Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 23:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Round two, let's go:

Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

If the comment is numbered, it must be addressed for the article to pass, if it is bulleted, it's an optional suggestion or comment that you don't need to act on right now.
When I quote things, you can use ctrl+f to search the page for the specific line I quoted.

1. "(Escuela México)" Same question as on Talk:Espanto I/GA1

   Removed

2. "As El Espanto he would wear an all black and white ring gear..." Is this the correct way to phrase this? I would put it as "he would wear an all black and white ring gear" but I'm unsure if this is the way ring gear is talked about.

   I think "an" should be removed, so I did ;-)

3. "A couple of months later El Santo would unmask Espanto I" The prose here is a little unencyclopedic and imprecise. Is there an estimate of how many months? If not, I can't fault you for that, but if there's something more precise that would be preferred.

   Unfortunately the Espanto II match does not have a date in any source I can find, only "1963", one said summer but that's as close as I could get so "a couple of months" is as close as I could get.

• Having read all three at this point, I feel like Los Espantos, Espanto I, and Espanto II should probably be merged. The amount of novel information on each one of them is rather limited, and the three articles have very heavy overlap. This is not part of the GA criteria and so is not going to factor into the review, but I think it's something to think about.

• I started out with just Los Espantos, but then got into details of their "pre-Espanto" career and Espanto II/III's career after Espanto I's death and I spun them into seperate articles as I was writing and researching, to allow each article to be more focused.

Results

On hold for a to be determined time. Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 02:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

• @Wugapodes: - Addressed the issues, and comment on the overlap.  MPJ-US  03:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Passed Wugapodes [t^hɔk] [kantʃɻɪbz] 03:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)