# Talk:Gilberto Lerma Plata

Little concerned about this sentence: 'In or around 2006, Lerma Plata was responsible for smuggling and/or attempting to smuggle 5 kg (11 lb) or more of cocaine and 1,000 kg (2,200 lb) of more of marijuana from Mexico to the U.S'
Source states that 'from in or around 2006 through on or
about July 29, 2011, to engage in a conspiracy with members of The Company to import
narcotics into the United States, or to his knowledge that such substances would be unlawfully
imported into the United States as part of the conspiracy.' and 'or about 2006 to on or about July 29, 2011, the date of Defendant’s indictment, whose objective
was to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana,'
So, he was intending 'to distribute' the narcotics, but did he actually smuggle them, as said in the current sentence? I think it might need a bit of clarification MX. Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 12:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Let me clarify how I understand the source: basically the U.S. government is alleging that Gilberto conspired to smuggle narcotics to the U.S. from Mexico between 2006 and 2011 (as gathered by his phone conversations, which explicitly mentioned the amounts he coordinated with other smugglers). The U.S. government didn't seize any drugs from Gilberto's direct network (at least no source I found mentions that), and didn't catch Gilberto with drugs while crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. But they suspect that those drugs could have reasonably made it into the U.S., but they rather stick to what's easier to prove: that there was intent from his part to move that quantity.
I do think it's clearer if we stick to the clear facts: he simply conspired ("intended") to smuggle. I've made the appropriate change. MX (✉ • ✎) 16:34, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
'and should not be judged separately' better verb needed?
'where they discussed cocaine and marijuana schemes' what kind of schemes? smuggling, transporting, growing, producing etc?
Apart from that, looks all good and the copyedit is done. Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 20:18, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gilberto Lerma Plata/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Criterion 1

On several occasions, there is an unnecessary comma before the dependent clause marker "when."
In several places, it appears that you have an unnecessary comma in a compound predicate.
A comma is due after "extortion" in "kidnappings, human smuggling, oil theft, extortion and piracy" to offset each item in the list.--Theroyalrambler (talk) 08:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 Done @Theroyalrambler: Thank you for the review. I've believed I've addressed your Critera 1 concerns. Please let me know if there are any commas you deem unnecessary. MX (✉ • ✎) 17:41, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
It appears that you have an unnecessary comma in a compound object in the sentence "The indictment stated that Lerma Plata helped procure weapons for the cartel to facilitate their drug operations, and that he was involved in money laundering." Consider removing it.
It appears that you have an unnecessary comma in a compound predicate in the sentence "... the witness had information about Flores Borrego's role in Lerma Plata's schemes, and confirmed that Flores Borrego worked under Lerma Plata by providing protection to the cartel as a policeman Consider removing it." Likewise in the sentnece "He was crossing to the U.S. to visit his family in the Rio Grande Valley on Good Friday, but was arrested after a U.S. official ran his information in their database and was notified that he was wanted by the D.D.C."
It appears that you are missing a comma after "Washington" in "... transferred to Washington D.C., where he..."
It appears that the indefinite pronoun "each" does not agree with the verb "were" in the sentence "... U.S. authorities stated that this meant that each of the crimes were concurrent.."
Note: I see no other grammatical or mechanical mistakes.--Theroyalrambler (talk) 22:40, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
Reviewer: Theroyalrambler (talk · contribs) 04:24, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done @Theroyalrambler: Yikes. Seems like my comma game isn't too strong. Thank you for pointing these out. I will keep an eye on them for my other articles. Thank you for the review. MX (✉ • ✎) 17:08, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
It appears that you have an unnecessary comma in a compound predicate after "Texas" in "... Mexico border to visit family members in Texas, and was arrested by..."
A knowledgeable audience may have difficulty reading this sentence: "An identity and bond hearing session was planned to be held on 12 April in McAllen, a common practice in federal court cases, but Lerma Plata's Brownsville-based attorney Noe Garza Jr. waived the identity session." Consider using simpler words, shortening the sentence, or breaking it into two.
A knowledgeable audience may have difficulty reading this sentence: "This amount was finalized after the prosecution proved that this was the gross profit amount the Gulf Cartel made in sales between 2006 and 2011 when it smuggled roughly 1,400,000 kg (3,100,000 lb) of cocaine and 8,000 metric tons of marijuana from Mexico to the U.S. Raman reiterated in the sentencing announcement that Lerma Plata used his police duties against the public good and to further his own interests." Consider removing any unnecessary words; and splitting it into two sentences.
"Given a credit" should be "given credit"--without the article.
A knowledgeable audience might find this sentence hard to read: "The federal sentencing guidelines were changed in the U.S. after his conviction, so his defense used that to argue that Lerma Plata was eligible for a new range (since his offense fell under the 121 and 151 months in the new revision)." Consider using simpler words, shortening the sentence, or breaking it into two.
You use abbreviations both with and without periods (e.g., "US" and "U.S."; "PRI"; "PGR"; "D.D.C."; &c.) Both styles are acceptable, but it is better to use one style throughout the article.
In the footnotes, a comma is due after "Tamaulipas" to offset the name in "... Ciudad Victoria, Tamaulipas in 2010."
In the footnotes, a comma is due after "Texas" in "Brownsville, Texas resident" to offset the state.
Note: After a more thorough examination, I found more issues after all, which I list above in full.
Theroyalrambler (talk) 10:10, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Criterion 2: Verifiable with no original research
The article contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; inline citations are from reliable sources; it contains no original research; it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism. Thus the article passes this criterion.--Theroyalrambler (talk) 09:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Criterion 3: Broad in its coverage:
It addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail. Thus it meets this criterion.
Criterion 4: Neutral:
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Thus it meets this criterion.
Criterion 5: stable:
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Thus it meets this criterion.
Criterion 6: Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
Media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Thus it meets this criterion. 
The article meets all the above criteria needed for approval, which I thus grant.--Theroyalrambler (talk) 06:09, 13 January 2020 (UTC)