"Polytechnic School [es] of Guatemala, where he earned the rank of sub-lieutenant" I presume the school is a military academy, but this is not clear from the text?
clarified
"Martínez was promoted to the rank of lieutenant on 17 November 1903; to captain on 23 August 1906; to captain major that same year during the Third Totoposte War against Guatemala, where he fought under former Salvadoran president and Brigadier General Tomás Regalado; to lieutenant colonel on 6 May 1909; and to colonel on 15 June 1914" This is a bit of a run on sentence, I think three semi-colons is the most I have ever seen. Are there some more details around his colonel level promotions?
Split into more sentences, and no.
"El Salvador was scheduled to have presidential elections in 1931. " And then they happened right? "was scheduled" is an odd way to phrase this
Reworded
There is an overall theme of odd sentence structure and sentences that are too long. I assume this is because you are translating the article from Spanish which is fine. However, please see my recent edit to the 1931 section where I broke up the sentences. Go through the whole article and try to use that style of breaking up the sentences. This will give it a much more pleasant read in English.
"The government also reduced interest rates by 40 percent and granted extensions to individuals who were unable to repay their loans."- with a interest rate reduction of this magnitude the reader is left wondering what they were to begin with.
couldnt find a source that says
sometimes you say minister of defense and sometimes you say minister of war. I think both are referring to the same position in Spanish. I'd pick one (minister of war in my preference) and stick with it
fixed
"Indian minorities in the country" -- I want to be careful about what Indian means in this article since you seem to use Pipil where other sources use Indian
The Pipil are only one of the country's Indian groups. Here Indian is general, where the article says Pipil is specific.
Points above here are covered.
Throughout the article, there are many references to the subject as Martinez. From the sources I was under the impression he was referred to as Hernandez. If I am incorrect can you quote a source here to show that? If I am correct, please change the references in article to use his normative name. Nevermind: I see the note "Maximiliano Hernández Martínez is commonly referred to in El Salvador as General "Martínez" (using his maternal surname) rather than General "Hernández" (using his paternal surname),[1][2] but he is sometimes referred to as General "Hernández Martínez" (using both of his surnames"
I think referring to Indians as Indigenous people might be better suited for WP if you think the term is accurate. As it stands, I think the lay English reader will confuse Indians with "Indians from India".
"Martínez married Araujo's former mistress, Concepción Monteagudo, as one of the conditions he agreed to with Araujo to become his vice president" This seems like a fairly important detail that should be covered in the main body on his vice presidential appointment.
Is it really accurate to say he was preceded by Civic directory in the infobox? I think that is a bit detailed on how the power transfer worked and Araujo is really the preceder
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
"Martínez's endorsement probably did not sway many voters" -- verified, However his endorsement is important for either reasons as the source specifies and should be covered here.
"Maximiliano Hernández Martínez was born on 21 October 1882 in San Matías, El Salvador. His parents were Raymundo Hernández and Petronila Martínez. Martínez[a] earned his bachelor's degree in San Salvador, El Salvador's capital city, after which he enrolled in the Polytechnic School [es] of Guatemala, where he earned the rank of sub-lieutenant" -- verified
"Martínez led a group of military officers on their own protest against Araujo's government in June 1931" -- I am still working on getting access to this source, but it is not clear what 'on their own protest' means here
reworded
"Ongoing economic problems caused by the Great Depression and the unrest that followed persisted through Araujo's presidency, leading to Martínez using his position as minister of defense to quell protests." -- verified
"officers refused to comply with Araujo's proposed budget cut" -- verified
"due to the government's failure to pay the military's wages" -- verified
"and Martínez's removal" -- FN21 seems to indicate that he was still VP or at least minister of war. In either case, his loyalty was certainly in question. I have not been able to access FN18 but I have good faith that there is clear evidence he was removed. Does this call into question the quality of FN21? It seems like both are reliable; however, the situation is very murky. I don't have any recommendation here. Just noting this.
"including Martínez himself" Do we have another source saying he was arrested? I think the way you expanded on this in the "Martínez's role in the coup remains unclear" paragraph is good. Maybe you don't need to say he was arrested here as that is somewhat of a POV on what happened.
removed
"His supporters claimed that the Civic Directory simply appointed him as provisional president" -- the Astilla citation for this should go through page 42
fixed
"When the municipal elections took place, results where the Communist Party won were suspended by the government" - the source indicates that this happened in some towns but that in other towns the results were simply not certified. I would still say this is verified but you might consider rewording
reworded
"Ismael Hernández believed that the United States would support the rebellion, confusing it for a pro-Araujo counterrevolution"
"rebels attacked and captured the towns and cities of Colón, Jayaque, Juayúa, Izalco, Nahuizalco, Salcoatitán, Sonzacate, Tacuba, and Teotepeque" -- verified
Anderson does not mention Pipils at all. Are you saying this is the name for the group he is calling Indians? I think that needs more sourcing.
Astilla 1976, pp. 69–70
"attempted to severe military communications from the captured towns to the cities of Ahuachapán, Santa Ana, and Sonsonate" -- verified
" initial rebellion resulted in the deaths of around fifty to seventy rebels, five soldiers, and ten police officers."
"After the rebellion had been completely suppressed, the army began reprisals against peasants in western El Salvador, especially targeting the Pipil.[63] The indiscriminate killing of civilians continued until mid-February 1932, once the government had determined that the region had been sufficiently "pacified".[64] As the killings disproportionately affected the Pipil population, some scholars have referred to the event as an ethnocide or a genocide" -- verified
"On 23 February 1932, the Salvadoran government suspended repayments of a 1922 loan from American and British lenders, in part because of Martínez's frustration with failing to receive recognition from the United States shortly after he assumed power." -- verified
"Martínez consulted the Bank of England" -- the source does not say that. It just says the BoE was consulted.
changed to BoE
"rate for over 40 years" -- are you just saying this because that is when the source was published? It could be longer? Of course the US monetary policy in the 1970's would make that surprising. However, this might be out of scope for this article
removed
"On 8 January 1935, Martínez established the Mortgage Bank to completely replace the country's three largest private banks' ability to offer loans" -- verified
"Martínez established the Central Reserve Bank on 19 June 1934" -- verified
"as he ran unopposed" -- verified maybe add historia 2 p.119 as a second source
added
"Martínez repealed the Salvadoran constitution of 1886,[110] and the Legislative Assembly ratified a new constitution on 1 March 1939.[112] Although Martínez's 1939 constitution prohibited re-election just as the 1886 constitution had done, it explicitly granted Martínez an exemption to seek re-election." -- verified, same comment about a second source
"In 1932, Martínez revoked the autonomy previously granted to the University of El Salvador, putting it under direct government control. His action led to students and professors protesting against the decision, and in 1934, the government restored the university's autonomy" -- verified
"More discriminatory laws were implemented in 1939, restricting the activities that Arabic, Chinese, and Lebanese minorities could participate in and where they could work." -- what about the laws/policies against Germans, Italians, and Japanese? historia 2 p.119 Luna p.52
"he use of machines in the manufacture of shoes and other types of clothing was banned in an effort to promote the learning of trades" -- verified
"The Salvadoran constitution of 1939 implemented several new laws and restrictions on civil liberties. The constitution prohibited the possession of firearms, explosives, and bullets; the consumption of alcoholic beverages and tobacco; and the usage of matches and all types of fossil fuel. The constitution also allowed the government to expropriate private property without prior notice to build new highways or for military purposes. It also mandated a government monopoly over all radio broadcasting in the country." -- verified
"Araujo won 106,777 votes" - The Grieb source says they won 101,000 votes. Would you like to comment on the discrepancy. This sources also calls out as particularly notable the voter enrollment in San Salvador. Maybe that is worth mentioning?
"The action of Minister Curtis during the crisis
exemplified the type of problem faced by the United
States when it did not have the best man on the post.
Unfamiliar with what his role should be in the event
of a revolt, he became deeply involved in the matter.
Based on his part experience, he advised the rebels that
General Martfnez would be their best choice for president. Under Article II of the 1923 Treaty. General
Martinez clearly was not 'recognizable.'" - This might be notable
international recognition section looks verified
" The government arrested communist leaders Farabundo Martí, Mario Zapata, and Alfonso Luna in San Salvador on 19 January." -- I think the arrest of Juan Pablo is equally notable here?
the economic policies section is missing the cuts and delays to civic servant salaries which seem notable?
"The bank pegged the Salvadoran colón at 2.5 colones" it also controlled the gold trade which is equally notable
In the social policies section it may make sense to have some reference to Anderson p.150 where the leader of Guatemala is mentioning the "fortune" of the communist uprising
"Martínez resigned as president and vice president on 28 August 1934" is the tactical side of getting recognition from the USA worth mentioning here? Anderson p.151
"Ernesto Interiano" -- should this be red text? I have no idea why his name is notable and the other attempts were not mentioned by name.
His manifesto for la matanza is covered. I wonder if there are additional writings of his that are notable?
Why did he choose Menendez to succeed him?
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
"Doctor Alejandro D. Marroquín argued that Martínez actually feared a pro-Araujo rebellion more than the communist rebellion and that by crushing the communist rebellion, he had hoped to deprive Araujo of rebels that could have supported his own counterrevolution." It seems like the Guatemalan element is essential to this theory. What is the reason for not mentioning their Labor party?
Anderson's comparison of Hernandez's actions in December and January seems like a nice way to tie the theories together. Maybe that can be included as a POV claim?
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Went back to last year, nothing notable in the rev history
6.Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
@PizzaKing13 Addressing your first round of revisions here. Largely you did a good job. You may notice that my comments did not cover the entire article but for what I covered and you revised I think everything is at GA level. One misconception was around my BoE comment. I did not mean that you should use the acronym, in fact I think the way you had it was better, I meant that the sources does not say Hernandez was the one that consulted the bank. You did not comment much on section 3 of the GAN. Are you planning to do or should I review as is? I do not have time today to cover the rest of the article but it is looking very good and I will finish out my first pass of the review during my next session.
@Czarking0: Hi, I was gonna get to section 3 later today or tomorrow. You can keep adding comments wether I get around to section 3 or not, but I should for sure by tomorrow. I'll look at the BoE thing again, and thanks for reviewing the article. PizzaKing13 (¡Hablame!) 🍕👑 01:16, 26 July 2024 (UTC)Reply
