# Talk:Luis Muñoz Rivera

This review is transcluded from Talk:Luis Muñoz Rivera/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 

The use of flagicons to establish nationality is highly controversial, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (icons). In this case, calling a Puerto Rican a nationality, all the time during his life-time Puerto Rico was both part of Spain and the United States, if difficult. Also, this flag was not taken into use until 1892, and even then it was a slightly different flag. I have therefore removed the flagicon in the infobox to make the article less controversial and more correct.
Actually, its kind of the mid-point and not inaccurate at all, Muñoz Rivera was in part responsible for Spain granting a separate nationality for the inhabitants of Puerto Rico, during his life he held the Spanish and Puerto Rican nationalities. As mentioned in the article, the American citizenship was not placed on Puerto Ricans until 1917, so he never held that one. The flag used was the modern one, that is the template's fault, but Jmundo handled it. - Caribbean~H.Q. 20:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Avoid contractions; e.g. use 'were not' instead of 'weren't'.
The sentence "After being released from prison, Cepeda criticized Baldorioty de Castro's policies, which led to his destitution as president of the party." need to be rewritten. It is not clear who became destituted; in addition, the word destitution cannot be used in this meaning, and is a too complex word to be used on Wikipedia at all.
There are some extremely long paragraphs in the article, for instance the lead and 'establishing an autonomous government'.
The prose says he died in Luquillo, while the infobox says Barranquitas.
Any possibility of successon boxes? Also, can the infobox be expanded to include his political positions. While included in the prose, I find it a bit difficult to quickly pinpoint his offices.
I would recommened a somewhat longer lead, preferably in two paragraphs.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
The online refs are not properly formatted.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
The article is pretty much ready, but I am placing it on hold until the comments have been resolved. Good work so far. Arsenikk (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Comments: Thanks Arsenikk for taking the time to review this article. I did a couple of minor fixes, fixed the online citation to the best of my knowledge, added a succession box for Resident commissioner and fixed the death place in the infobox.  --J.Mundo (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I have included in the infobox his political positions, replaced the "destitution' sentence and divided the paragraphs into smaller ones. --J.Mundo (talk) 15:11, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations with a good article. Arsenikk (talk) 12:31, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for  your time and attention. --J.Mundo (talk) 21:33, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Can someone expand on the Plan de Ponce, not much available on the internet about these propositions for independence from Spain with alliance before the Treaty of Paris.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.19.166 (talk) 17:46, 17 January 2011 (UTC)