# Talk:Elvia Carrillo Puerto

I found the following a website and what appears to be a book about Elvia Carrillo Puerto. I think that they should be added to the article as references. 
This wordpress site appears legit - https://elviacarrillopuerto.wordpress.com/ . It contains a Sources page which also appears legit. https://elviacarrillopuerto.wordpress.com/sources/
I can't read Spanish but this book also appears legit and could be used to inform this article  - https://portalciudadano.diputados.gob.mx/documents/elvia-c.pdf
Comments? George (talk) 01:24, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Just a heads up that I am planning on overhauling and improving this article as part of the ongoing Women in Green Good Article Editathon. My primary goals are to improve sourcing and to expand the article in preparation for a GA review. I will be working in my sandbox, so feel free to check my progress there and message me if you feel there are issues with the sandbox content or if you have ideas for sources. There will probably be a very big edit coming tomorrow or in the next couple days. If there are issues with that edit once it goes through, let me know and we can discuss it here. Thank you! Spookyaki (talk) 20:52, 10 May 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Elvia Carrillo Puerto/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Spookyaki (talk · contribs) 13:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 09:04, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
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): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Image review

File:Elvia Carrillo P (2)-1.jpg: A reference to a reliable source is missing at Commons.
I didn't post the image, so not sure exactly what the source is (aside from the fact that it's from a family archive). Reverse image search doesn't return anything from an archive, so I assume the archive is not online. I did find a copy in Sauri Riancho, which claims that it is in the Mediateca del INAH, but cannot seem to find it there. Alamy also does have it listed as Public Domain. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
The photo appears to have been taken nearly a century ago, and a comparison with images available at INAH suggests that it is indeed her. Borsoka (talk) 12:20, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
File:Primer Congreso Feminista de Yucatán en 1916.jpg: US PD tag is missing at Commons.
Done. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
File:Yucatan Burial Letter, Elvia Carrillo Puerto.png: Could the source be determined more specifically (publisher, year of publication, page)? Borsoka (talk) 09:04, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Done. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Source review

Why do you think Estrada Alcorta (2011) is a reliable source? Borsoka (talk) 09:04, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
It is reasonably well-cited and was written under the direction of a thesis advisor. Because it's from a Master's thesis, I also attributed the claim derived from this source. It is, I believe, the only source that discusses this topic at any length. Without it, we will simply have to say that Cano replaced Manrique for an unspecified reason. That may be fine, up to you. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
References 2, 48, 65 are OK.
Comments

When a scholar's view is introduced, mainly the verb "claim" is used. Please read and apply MOS:CLAIM.
Sure. Changed to "state"/"states"/"stated" in most cases. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
I would choose other verbs as well, but it is not a huge problem during a GAN review.
She also attended the second Congreso Feminista... Rephrase it, because her previous attendance at the first congress is not certain.
Done: She did attend the second Feminist Congress... Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
She also faced persecution... Could at least one example be mentioned?
So the source simply says that Carranza "cracked down" on socialists and that Carrillo "moved to Mexico City to escape political persecution". I did add one example from the source that talks about what the "crackdown" entailed: Yucatecan socialists, including Carrillo, also faced persecution under the presidency of Venustiano Carranza, with the offices of the Socialist Party of Yuacatán being raided, prompting Carrillo to temporarily relocate to Mexico City for over a year beginning in November 1919. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Throughout the early 1920s,... At the same time,... I would avoid this structure.
Why? Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
I would delete "At the same time,..." Borsoka (talk) 12:20, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Done. Spookyaki (talk) 15:46, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
...for the league's women... Perhaps "for the league's female members"?
Sure. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
In the November elections, Elvia Carrillo Puerto won... Why not "In the November elections, she/Carrillo won..."?
Changed. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
...one of the two women to be elected... Three women are listed.
Fixed. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
A link to "agrarian redistribution"?
I assume to land reform? Done. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
...Carrillo was terminated from her position as a statistician at the Secretariat of Economy... This position is not mentioned in previous sentences. Borsoka (talk) 10:36, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
Yeah, this is a limitation from the sources. There are two that discuss this (Peniche Rivero 2011 and Sauri Riancho 2021). Both simply say that she was fired without mentioning when she was hired in the first place:
For Elvia, the case was also a new ordeal because in January 1938 she was dismissed from her job at the Ministry of Economy, where she held a position as a statistician. (Peniche Rivero 2011, p. 101)
In January 1938, a month before the PNR-PRM began to move closer to the FUPDM, Elvia was dismissed from her job at the Ministry of Economy, where she worked as a statistician. (Sauri Riancho 2021, p. 69) Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
I would introduce her new job: "Meanwhile, she was employed as .... but she was dismissed...", or something similar. (It is quite obvious, that she must have been hired to be fired, so this is not OR.) Borsoka (talk) 12:20, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Sure, went with Carrillo was employed as a statistician at the Secretariat of Economy, but was terminated from her position in January 1938. Meanwhile, her son was also dismissed from his position as a stamp inspector in Sonora.
@Borsoka: Hi! Thank you to taking on this review. I have responded to all comments. I also removed some of the unnecessary Spanish translations. Spookyaki (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

(Lead) Could you avoid mentioning twice that she founded the Rita Cetina Gutiérrez Feminist League? Borsoka (talk) 12:27, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
@Borsoka: Sure, done. Spookyaki (talk) 15:46, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for this thoroughly researched, interesting article. I have just passed it. Borsoka (talk) 09:48, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

So why was she called a 'nun'? What was supposed to be nun-like about her? It is not immediately obvious to the reader, given that she was married twice/thrice (depending on how you count), had two children, was not a cleric of any kind and her activity had nothing to do with religion. Speaking of which, the spouses could be listed in the infobox. 62.73.72.101 (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Most sources just say that it was due to her advocacy for social causes (possibly her nun-like devotion to feminism/socialism, but that’s personal speculation). There might be more specific elaboration in Lemaitre’s biography of Carrillo (titled Elvia Carrillo Puerto: la monja roja del Mayab, transl. 'Elvia Carrillo Puerto: The Red Nun of the Mayab'), but I do not have access to this source. Neither of her spouses are independently notable, so I don’t think they need to be listed in the infobox. Spookyaki (talk) 15:03, 19 September 2025 (UTC)