Talk:Rodrigo Gularte/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Notecardforfree (talk · contribs) 22:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

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.	See comments for portions of the article that require clarification.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	See comments for issues with lead.
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.	There are a number of unsourced assertions in this article.
	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).	The author utilizes reliable sources (mostly news article).
	2c. it contains no original research.	No concerns about original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	See comments -- this article needs to be expanded.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	This article does not lose focus.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	There are no problems with neutrality.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	This article has been stable since May 2015.
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.	See comments.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	N/A.
	7. Overall assessment.	See comments.

Comments from Notecardforfree

There are a few issues that need to be resolved before this article can pass this GA review. I listed comments about specific sections below, but in general, you need to make sure that every assertion is supported by a citation to a reliable source. Additionally, I don't think this article satisfies the breadth requirement. You need to include more background information about why Gularte was in Indonesia, how he became involved in drug trafficking (you should certainly mention the fact that he may have been manipulated), and you need to provide more details about his arrest. Although the GA criteria allow for "shorter articles," you need to make sure you provide enough information for readers to understand the background events that ultimately led to Gularte's execution.

Lead

• This section needs to be developed further. Per WP:LEAD, this section should include "well-composed paragraphs." You should combine the separate sentences into a complete paragraph that tells readers why this individual is notable (you may want to mention international reactions here; see also WP:PARAGRAPHS.)
• In the infobox, you say that he is known for "drug trafficking." Don't you think it would be more fair to say that he is really know for the controversial execution?

Early life

• You write: "He was a keen surfer and relatives remember him as a tall, gentle, polite and kind young boy who slipped into depression, and became involved in drugs after his parents divorced when he was 13." These assertions need to be supported by citations.
• In the paragraph that begins with "His first treatment for drug addiction ...." you need to support every assertion with a citation. As far as I can tell, you only provide a citation for the assertion that he had a son. I think many of these assertions can be supported by the BBC Brazil article.
• Again, you need to support every assertion in the paragraph that begins with "Sponsored by his mother ...." with a citation to a reliable source. You provide a citation to the BBC Brazil article at the end of the paragraph, but I don't think the article supports every assertion you make in that paragraph (see WP:CITEDENSE).

Arrest

• This sections includes no citations at all. Please be sure to support every assertion with a citation to a reliable source.

Conviction and imprisonment

• You write, "Indonesian authorities did not allow his transfer since the experts were hired by the defense." Can you include a citation to a reference that supports this assertion? The SMH source does not say that the experts who made the diagnosis were ignored because they were hired by Gularte's defense team.

Execution

• You should combine the various one-sentence paragraphs into coherent, well-developed paragraphs per WP:PARAGRAPHS.
• You write, "The note says that Brazil will work in international human rights bodies for the abolition of the death penalty." What note is this?

References

• Per WP:CITE, "Each article should use one citation method or style throughout." it doesn't look like you are using a consistent citation system here.
• Although Wikipedia allows authors to use any consistent citation system, bare URLs generally should not be included in citations (see WP:CITESTYLE).

Images

• According to WP:GACR, Good Articles should be illustrated, if possible, by images. There are plenty of images Rodrigo Gularte floating around the internet. Can you upload one pursuant to a fair use rationale?

Please let me know if you have any questions or if any of my comments don't make sense. I will put this review on hold for one week so that these issues can be resolved. Best, -- Notecardforfree (talk) 22:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC) @Notecardforfree this is a lot of work. I may not be able to do it in a week. I am busy with some other articles. This is gonna take some time. But thanks for the guidelines. They'll be done on renom. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 06:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

@Shhhhwwww!!: how much time do you think you will need? I can keep this review open past December 4; I certainly wouldn't want you to have to wait many months for another review. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 07:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I am juggling a few articles about certain elections in a particular country. Waiting months would be okay. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 07:21, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Okay then, per your request, I am going to close this review. Feel free to ping me when you renominate this. If I have time, I will take another look at the article. Good luck with your current endeavors! Best, -- Notecardforfree (talk) 07:33, 29 November 2015 (UTC)