Talk:Bruno Márquez

GA Review

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

Reviewer: PCN02WPS (talk · contribs) 05:50, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll be reviewing this nomination over the coming days. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 05:50, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Overall review

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.	Any concerns for this criterion will be listed below.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	MOS:LEADLENGTH says the lead for articles under 15,000 characters should be one to two paragraphs, so the lead should be lengthened to at least one full paragraph; it should also give a more broad overview of the whole article, perhaps with mentions of his college career, a more broad overview of his professional career, and maybe a sentence on his international career.
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.	A few things here: [1] Reference 4 should be written in sentence case, rather than all caps, per MOS:ALLCAPS. [2] None of the "pitlane.mx" sources (10, 11, 15) are loading for me, so I'm not sure whether those are dead links or just a problem on my part - can you still load them? [3] The three above sources and Ref 24 should have their "website" parameters altered to be the name of the website, not the url, like in the rest of the citations.
	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).	Pending the issues with 10/11/15 above.
	2c. it contains no original research.	The "awards and honors" section is unsourced; that will need a citation supporting each of the years he won each of those awards. The infobox concerns me a bit: according to this roster I've found for the 2022 season, there are a few things that are incorrect. Márquez's jersey number is 13, not 12; his age is given as 35 years, not 31; and his height is listed at 1.9 m, not 1.88. I very well may have missed them but I can't find mention or sourcing in the prose for his three LFA records that are listed in the infobox. If you wanted to, you could add his weight to the infobox as well, which is listed in the above-linked roster as being 86 kg.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig gives a score of 6.5%, no worries there.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	No issues.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Some intricate detail about statistics, but they are not out of place and don't take away from the article; if anything, they help provide context. I would almost say that some sections (Int'l career, mainly) suffer the opposite problem, and might need a little more detail.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No issues.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Only five edits in the article's history at this time, with no hint of instability.
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.	Image is in the public domain.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Image is used in infobox and is of the subject.
	7. Overall assessment.	A little bit of work to do to flesh some parts out and fully source some other parts, but it's doable.

Issues with criterion 1a (grammar/spelling)

• The target article Raptors Naucalpan does not include "the" before its name in the lead; admittedly, I am unfamiliar with naming conventions for Mexican football teams, but is this "the" necessary in the first sentence?
• "After serving as a backup in his first seaoson" → typo
• On Wikipedia, typically American football scores are given with the first score being the team in question; in this case "...lost in the national championship game to Auténticos Tigres UANL by a score of 16–15." would be switched to "by a score of 15–16" - there are a couple other instances of this
• "Week 3" and the like should probably be spelled out as "week three" per MOS:SPELL09
• I know the 2022 season doesn't start for a few more days, but you could perhaps add a note about if anything happened during the offseason or lead-up to the start of this season.
• Citation needed for the last sentence in the first paragraph and the last part of the sentence in the second paragraph.
• Personal life section should probably have something about how he is from Mexico City, with a source.

Hello. Thanks for taking this review. A few points here. I didn't find anything from this past offseason in the news, or anything leading up to the current season, so I was not able to add more updated information other than "the 2021 season was cancelled." Secondly, not sure how you feel about what I did with the height and weight in the infobox? Would that be inaccurate? I couldn't find a way to express it in cm and kg. As for his age, I really don't know anymore. This says he's 24 in late 2013 (his fifth year in college) and this also says he's 24 in February 2014. Either way, I can't find a reliable source on his date or place of birth so I removed them entirely. Still working on sourcing overall but everything else has been addressed. JTtheOG (talk) 02:53, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

The lead is much better. I don't have a problem with the height/weight in the infobox, since the metric conversions are accurate. No problem with what you put about the 2021 season. I hate that the date of birth had to be removed, I'm sure one of those is correct but without a reliable source, especially on a BLP, I think you made the right call. There was a decent bit of prose added since I last looked at the article (well done, it all looks very good), so my only other outstanding concerns are listed below.

• The lead mentions that he is a Mexico City native, but this has been removed from the infobox and isn't mentioned in the body of the article. If sourcing exists for this, it should be added back to the infobox and mentioned in the "personal life" section; if no sourcing exists, it should probably be removed from the lead as well.
• The second mention of Raptors Naucalpan in the lead doesn't need to be linked.
• The info about his college team and his two MVP awards are mentioned multiple times in the lead; I'd recommend taking each down to one mention in the lead.
• "Eduardo "Pocho" Herrera ONEFA player of the year" → "Player of the Year" should probably be capitalized in that style; I also cannot load this citation, but if you can then I'll AGF.

Other than that it looks great! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:31, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Just checked back in here and I see that these changes have been addressed so I'm happy to give the tick. Thanks very much for your patience and congrats. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 19:59, 10 March 2022 (UTC)