Talk:Trial of Yolanda Saldívar

Infobox?

AJona1992, I noticed this article at GA nominations, and think this article could benefit greatly from the use of Template:Infobox court case. Right now, the only visual is the non-free image of the Texas Monthly and Time covers. Other than that, it's visually a big glut of text. The infobox could help potential reviewers to quickly determine if this is something that interests them. — Maile (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

@Maile66:, I didn't know there was an infobox for this type of topic. Thanks for notifying me, jona^(talk) 17:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

Collapsed for readability of talk page
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This review is transcluded from Talk:People of the State of Texas v. Yolanda Saldívar/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. Reviewer: GregJackP (talk · contribs) 06:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC) Criteria . . Good Article Status - Review Criteria Further information: WP:WIAGA A good article is— Well-written: (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Verifiable with no original research: (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; (b) 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); and (c) it contains no original research. Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Review Well-written: Criteria Notes Result (a) (prose) Grammar needs work. Fail (b) (MoS) The reviewer has no notes here. Undetermined Verifiable with no original research: Criteria Notes Result (a) (references) See discussion, below. Fail (b) (citations to reliable sources) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass (c) (original research) The reviewer has no notes here. Undetermined Broad in its coverage: Criteria Notes Result (a) (major aspects) The title of the article is not correct. The State of Texas styles all of its criminal cases as The State of Texas v. Name of Person and does not use the "People" in the title. The article needs to be moved to the proper title. Fail (b) (focused) The reviewer has no notes here. Undetermined Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Notes Result The reviewer has no notes here. Undetermined Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Notes Result The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: Criteria Notes Result (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) The use of non-free images is problematic. Don't know (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) The reviewer has no notes here. Pass Result Result Notes Fail The reviewer has no notes here. Discussion 1.a. Prose. The grammar needs a lot of work. I would suggest withdrawing the nomination and having someone copy-edit the article. GregJackP Boomer! 07:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 2.a. Citations. Ref #1 is cited to state that Saldivar is a Tejano music fan, but the book states the opposite, that she was not a Tejano fan, but a country music fan. This was changed from a previous edit on the murder article and was pasted onto this article by accident. I fixed that she was a country music fan, however, two others books (one just added) says differently about her taste in music. I added that she did enjoy Tejano (maybe at the time of the interview in 1996 she was may had felt differently) and that she was interested in opening up a fan club for Shelly Lares. jona(talk) 19:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC) The same reference says nothing about the fan club on p.72. It was on page 73. Fixed, jona(talk) 19:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC) Ref #4 does not support the text. The first one was a page behind and the second text does support the claim. jona(talk) 19:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC) Ref #10 does not support the text. With less than 10% of the refs checked, there are already 3 of 10 that are bad. GregJackP Boomer! 07:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC) 6.a. Image tags. The image used in the infobox is a composite of two non-free images combined into one. The Texas Monthly may be OK, as it covers the trial, but the Time cover merely shows Selena and talks of a new movie about her. That does not fall within the fair-use rationale for this article. GregJackP Boomer! 07:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC) The text does support that Quintanilla, Jr. had documentation that proved she was forging checks under her sister's name, it does not support the $60,000 claim which I replaced. jona(talk) 19:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC) While the text in Time may support the article, you are using the image. The image itself must support the article, which it does not, and therefore fails a fair use test. GregJackP Boomer! 14:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC) I don't mind withdrawing this article, but I would really appreciate it if you can go through it so I can fix all the issues. Also, you may be reading the 2015 edition of the book and is why you can't find the text in the same order. Best, jona(talk) 19:41, 27 April 2015 (UTC) Sure, I'll go through it, but it will probably take a little time. GregJackP Boomer! 14:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Thank you! jona(talk) 22:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC) Prose. There are quite a few errors, I would recommend that rather than relying on me (it will take forever if I do the grammar), that when everything else is addressed, you ask the Guild of Copy Editors (WP:GOCE) to run through the article. Make sure you tell them that it is for a run at Good Article. They are real helpful, I've used them on my own GA and FA noms. Refs. fn35: Does not support the statement. The judge raised the bond to $500K, not the District Attorney, who does not have the authority to do so. The book said that the DA asked a judge to increase it, not that the DA did so himself. fn42: You need to clarify that the "worth $50 million" was the opinion of one man, Racehorse Hayes. The source does not state that the entire team spent $20K, it states that the mock trial alone cost $20K. Charles Arnold was not "likened," he was "liked," according to the source. The statement about the rape exam and lying is not supported. According to this source, Selina realized that she was being lied to, not the nurses. I'll get to some more later. GregJackP Boomer! 04:22, 3 May 2015 (UTC) Additional notes

Article move

I moved the article to Trial of Yolanda Saldívar from the title of People of the State of Texas v. Yolanda Saldívar. Texas does not use that style for its case names, it uses the State v. Name style. In addition, that style is really mainly used in appellate decisions, and this is not an appellate case. GregJackP Boomer! 04:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Does that mean the case name in the infobox should be State of Texas v. Yolanda Saldívar, like in the lead? – Wdchk (talk) 02:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)