Talk:Last use of capital punishment in Spain/GA1
Latest comment: 8 years ago by FunkMonk in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 17:32, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, I'll review this article. FunkMonk (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
- "2011 memorial to two of those executed" I'd say memorial for, and give a date for when this picture is from. Also write their full names in the caption.
see comment below
- "Franco had come to power after the Spanish Civil War" You could give a date for context.
Done.
- "ETA(pm)" You need space before the parenthesis.
- Done.
- "Although up to 200,000 were" Add people.
- Done.
- "The Burgos trials (es)" I'm not sure links to foreign language Wikipedias can be made like this.
- see comment below
- Everything linked in the intro should also be linked in the article body.
- Names of all organisations should be spelled out at first mention. Now, ETA is explained nowhere, for example, and others are only explaine din the intro.
- see comment below, changed this to ETA political-military
- "debated a socialist motion" What is meant by this?
- Clarified.
- "Juan Txiki Paredes, Juan Paredes Mano, Juan Paredes Manot, Txiki". Why is his name spelled in three different ways? You should be consistent, also in what name you use throughout.
- Done.
- "Angel Otaegui, Ángel Otaegui, Otaegi". Likewise. Check for more name inconsistencies.
- Done. That was down to the Spanish and Basque versions of his name being used in the sources.
- Why no date under Executions?
- "in protest at the embassy attack" Of the?
- see comment below
- "with its ambassador to Portugal unconditionally withdrawn in protest at the embassy attack." Wasn't that attack in response to the sentence rather than the executions? "The Spanish Embassy in Lisbon was attacked and set on fire."
- It seems the US downplayed international condemnation a few times, any elaboration of why?
- Done.
- "controlled by the Spanish government,[33] was supportive of the government." Perhaps say "supportive of the executions", to avoid repetition of government.
- Done.
- "authoritarian Spanish leader, Francisco Franco" Why is he only presented and linked second time he is mentioned in the intro?
- Done.
- "a storm of criticism" Too hyperbolic.
- Done.
- Sources in Spanish need the "language" parameter.
- FunkMonk thanks a lot for taking the time to review this. I'll get to work on that, but there are some exceptions where I'd disagree that changes need to be made.
- On the photo, I could change that to "2013 photo of 2011 memorial to Juan Txiki Paredes Manot and Angel Otaegui" but that seems a bit clunky and cumbersome.
- I don't see any problem with "memorial to" for example a memorial to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr or articles such as Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe or Memorial to Ippolito Merenda
- Similarly, "in protest at" is fine. See French workers march in protest at changes to 35-hour working week or Ai Weiwei shuts Danish show in protest at asylum-seeker law for example.
- Regarding Burgos trials (es), per WP:REDDEAL that is an acceptable way to link.
- Regarding spelling out ETA, yes, acronyms should usually be spelt out on first mention. But per MOS:ACRO: an "exception is when something is most commonly known by its acronym (i.e., its article here is at the acronym title)." In this case, the WP:COMMONNAME is ETA, not Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, as it is hardly ever referred to that way in either English or Spanish.
- Lastly, I don't follow your point regarding the Embassy in Portugal. Can you clarify? Valenciano (talk) 15:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Your exceptions seem fine, though I think the meaning of ETA could at least be mentioned in parenthesis in the article, especially because it seems to be a specific section of the group (pm), which sís not part of the common name, and therefore less known. As for the Portugal issue, you mention that the embassy was attacked in response to the sentences. But under responses to the executions, you write "with its ambassador to Portugal unconditionally withdrawn in protest at the embassy attack." So did they only withdraw their ambassador after the executions, even though it was in response to the earlier attack? FunkMonk (talk) 15:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- I've added ticks so we can more easily see what's been done and what's pending. Let me know if any of my changes don't meet requirements. I changed ETA to ETA political-military. In the Portugal case, yes, it was in response to the earlier attack. Could change it to say that, but I thought it was clear enough from context. Valenciano (talk) 16:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Changes look good. I've noted where something still needs to be done. As for the embassy, I was wondering why that info isn't in the Reactions to sentences section instead? FunkMonk (talk) 18:03, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. Linking and sources in Spanish still pending. Regarding the embassy situation, it isn't in the "reactions to sentences" section because it didn't occur then. There are 2 different events. The Spanish embassy was attacked as a reaction to the sentences. Following the executions, there were international reactions to them and Spain responded by withdrawing a number of ambassadors temporarily and the Portuguese one more permanently. Valenciano (talk) 18:30, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Ok. Last issue apart from the language parameter and linking, something is wrong with reference 12. When these are fixed, I'll pass the articles. FunkMonk (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Fixed that. The rest might take a few days. I'd expect to have it done by Sunday and will ping you when done. Valenciano (talk) 18:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Ok. Last issue apart from the language parameter and linking, something is wrong with reference 12. When these are fixed, I'll pass the articles. FunkMonk (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Yes. Linking and sources in Spanish still pending. Regarding the embassy situation, it isn't in the "reactions to sentences" section because it didn't occur then. There are 2 different events. The Spanish embassy was attacked as a reaction to the sentences. Following the executions, there were international reactions to them and Spain responded by withdrawing a number of ambassadors temporarily and the Portuguese one more permanently. Valenciano (talk) 18:30, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Changes look good. I've noted where something still needs to be done. As for the embassy, I was wondering why that info isn't in the Reactions to sentences section instead? FunkMonk (talk) 18:03, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- I've added ticks so we can more easily see what's been done and what's pending. Let me know if any of my changes don't meet requirements. I changed ETA to ETA political-military. In the Portugal case, yes, it was in response to the earlier attack. Could change it to say that, but I thought it was clear enough from context. Valenciano (talk) 16:21, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
- Your exceptions seem fine, though I think the meaning of ETA could at least be mentioned in parenthesis in the article, especially because it seems to be a specific section of the group (pm), which sís not part of the common name, and therefore less known. As for the Portugal issue, you mention that the embassy was attacked in response to the sentences. But under responses to the executions, you write "with its ambassador to Portugal unconditionally withdrawn in protest at the embassy attack." So did they only withdraw their ambassador after the executions, even though it was in response to the earlier attack? FunkMonk (talk) 15:49, 10 March 2016 (UTC)