Talk:Victor Macedo/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Arawoke (talk · contribs) 14:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Spookyaki (talk · contribs) 17:43, 11 November 2024 (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, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Unfortunately, I think I am going to have to quick fail this article. To start things off, though, I want to commend you on your hard work and exhaustive research. As someone who has been trained in writing academic history, I believe this would be excellent academic writing. Unfortunately, some of the things that make it good academic writing make it unsuitable for Wikipedia. Specifically, this article relies almost exclusively on original research (see WP:OR). Your sources are almost all primary sources (see WP:PRIMARY). This problem would need to be fixed before the article proceeds to GA status.

Other potentially minor issues include the (a) broadness of coverage and (b) image attribution:

(a) Is there no information on Macedo outside of his role in the Putumayo genocide? It may be that there's not, in which case, there's nothing you can do, but it seems general biographic coverage is perhaps lacking. Specifically, adding information on his early life, if available, would be beneficial to the article.

(b) Some images seem to be listed as CC-4.0, but without clear justification. This image, for example, seems to come from a copyrighted book. To be clear, I think that this image would probably be public domain given how old it is, but the specific attribution is wrong. Same for this image. Nowhere is the book this image comes from listed as CC-4.0, though in this case, I think both the book and the image would be public domain. This image is explicitly copyrighted and not covered under CC-4.0. The links to the sources on this image and this image are broken. You should probably change out most of these CC-4.0 licenses for public domain ones. For help with this, you can ask clarifying questions on Commons:Village pump.

Again, thank you for your hard work and I hope to see this article resubmitted in the future! Spookyaki (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.