Talk:Armin Luistro

Learn more about this page

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Armin Luistro article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Armin Luistro was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 3, 2011	Good article nominee	Not listed

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Politics and Government / Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Mid-importance).

Education Mid‑importance

	Education portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tambayan Philippines Mid‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Catholicism Low‑importance

Armin Luistro is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Lead section

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I encourage the nominator to read WP:LEAD and peruse the leads in WP:FA and WP:GAN. Generally, the lead should be a brief, low-detail summary of the article. Anything cited in the article doesn't need to be cited in the lead. Leads longer than 4 paragraphs are generally discouraged. —Designate (talk) 20:20, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

That's correct, and the problem is mentioned in the GA review. – Quadell ^(talk) 23:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

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

Reviewer: – Quadell ^(talk) 18:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Reply
Nominator: User:Moray An Par

I'm currently in the process of reviewing... – Quadell ^(talk) 20:28, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
	1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	The prose is a somewhat stilted. In the lede, many sentences in a row begin "He" and a past-tense verb, with little variety in sentence structure. In the body, there are many awkward phrasings: "He was conferred a doctor's degree" rather than "He received a doctorate"; "on May 2005" rather than "in May of 2005"; "was the reason why" rather than "was the reason that"; etc. I'd suggest submitting the article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors before nominating for GA again.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The infobox and categories are fine. The lede is a good summary of all sections of the article, and contains no unique information. This is exactly what a lede should do. But at 6 paragrahs, it is too long for an article of this length. Detailed information (such a financial comparisons, or when he professed his final vows) don't need to be in the lede. Also, the lede does not need to contain footnoted references, since the same material is referenced when it is presented in the body.
	2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	References are formatted fine.
	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).	Sourcing is excellent. Claims are stated when appropriate, and in my checks, all claims are backed up by the sources. I found no plagiarism.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No problems.
	3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	I believe so.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Only the lede is too detailed, as discussed above.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Most of it is admirably neutral. But the K+12 section devotes a lot of space to a lengthy quote by an advocacy group. Either the quote should be reduced to a single sentence, or it should be cut entirely.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No problems.
	6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	After thoroughly investigating the image, I'm satisfied that it's correctly tagged.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	It would be better with more images, but the images are fine.
	7. Overall assessment.	The biggest problem is the quality of the English prose. If you submit the article to Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors and fix the few issues above, I think it should be ready for GA status soon.

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Armin Luistro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)Reply