Talk:Torristas and Molinistas

Torristas and Molinistas has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 10, 2024. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Torristas and Molinistas appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 January 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a political feud in the Eastside of Los Angeles began when Gloria Molina was told by Art Torres that she was not the chosen candidate to run for an office?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Torristas and Molinistas.

Wikipedia

United States: Latin and Hispanic heritage / 50,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Hispanic and Latino Americans portal This article is supported by WikiProject Latin and Hispanic heritage.
	This article was created or improved during this WikiProject's 50,000 Challenge, which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help!

California: Southern California Mid‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Southern California task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

GA Review

Passed. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 23:26, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Reppop (talk · contribs) 06:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Alexeyevitch (talk · contribs) 05:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article soon. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 05:15, 10 October 2024 (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.	Question: Does 'President' need to be capitalized? I thought that since it was a formal title before the name that it should be capitalized? I see on these ([1] [2]) websites that they capitalize president before a name. OK. En-US is consistent Although the area was predominantly Mexican American, they had little elected representation in any legislature... "Although" is likely needless and the source does not even mention it. Changed to "The area was predominantly Mexican American, but had little elected representation in any legislature."
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	I see that there are multiple duplicate wlnks in the article, I would recommend removing them as per MOS:DL I can't really see them (might be missing them entirely), could you provide some examples? I have removed one. I have verified the content in the lede is backed up by reliable sources in the article. Layout is correct.~~No WtW~~ are in the article. I want to note that this article uses the word "despite" a lot. Prehaps can be omitted or replaced by something? Changed two instances: Removed the first instance, changed to "Although Torres was endorsed by..." in the third instance OK. Passed. MOS:THETITLE is correct.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	(optional) Add archived references. (optional but recommended) Prehaps use "Works cited" instead of "Sources" Changed to "Works cited".
	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).	NY Times, LA Times are reliable sources. All other sources appear to be secondary sources with no concerns of reliabilty. A thumbs up from me for criteria 2b.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Ref 20 does not mention In the early 2020s. Changed to "In 2024..." OK
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig noticed a minor issue: The area's first Latino politician was Ed Roybal, who was elected to the Los Angeles City Council in 1949 by a coalition of Latino, Jewish, and Black voters, with support from the Community Service Organization... could be slightly reworded (possibly: In 1949, a coalition of Black, Jewish and Latino voters). I changed it to "In 1949, a coalition of Black, Jewish and Latino voters elected Mexican-American Ed Roybal to the Los Angeles City Council with support from the Community Service Organization." OK. I will now start a spot-check. Completed. Passed.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	GA doesn't ask for the "comprehensiveness" of FAs but this article is concise and does not go in to needless detail. Pass.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Passed. No issues of neutrality.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Passed. No edit wars etc.
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.	Verified image licenses from the image sources
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images have good captions '
	7. Overall assessment.	Passed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.