Talk:2017 Catalan general strike

2017 Catalan general strike 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 6, 2019. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Organized Labour Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Spain Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Limited recognition Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Limited recognition, a WikiProject dedicated to improving the coverage of entities with limited recognition on Wikipedia by contributing to articles relating to unrecognized states and separatist movements. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join our WikiProject by signing your name at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.Limited recognitionWikipedia:WikiProject Limited recognitionTemplate:WikiProject Limited recognitionLimited recognition articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Catalan-speaking countries: Catalonia Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking countries 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.Catalan-speaking countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesTemplate:WikiProject Catalan-speaking countriesCatalan-speaking countries articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Catalonia (assessed as Mid-importance).

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 150 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

The revision reinstated false statements such as Military Police and treats as verifiable numbers wild and unverified (and exaggerated) claims from Catalan officials. It describes a referendum held in defiance of an injunction from the Constitutional Court as "Contentious" rather than as "illegal" and in general reflects a totally non-neutral vision of a complex issue.
— edit summary

If you have an issue with any of the stats/language as presented, raise them for individual discussion here. The article relies almost entirely on major newspapers, but even its minor papers are reputable. If you want to refute their reporting, you must provide a similarly reputable source for the counterclaim, as we counterweight reliable claims with other evidence before simply deleting information. However, none of the proposed changes were cited, and much of the proposed edit was patently non-neutral: "pro-independence" → "radical right-wing" and "fascist"; "warned" → "lied"; "referendum" → "fake referendum". Come on. czar 13:00, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:2017 Catalan general strike/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kingsif (talk · contribs) 03:43, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this, comments will be here soon Kingsif (talk) 03:43, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Lead a bit too long for article length
• The note on national unions doesn't need to be in brackets
• 'Planning' would be better titled 'Background'
• The sentence "Firefighters and the Catalan police served as supportive, improvised order at some protests" doesn't really make sense - improvising order?
• "Seven Nation Army" should be styled like that ("Seven Nation Army"), not in italics - could also add that it's a song by the White Stripes
• Some odd word usage (possibly from a direct translation of flowery language) that I've replaced with more common terms
• Generally good - just the fixes mentioned above

• Lead also a bit too detailed - a lot of it could be moved to 'Planning'
• Coverage suitable and well-managed
• Pass

• Unusual top image (media), but it works
• Good use of media
• Pass

• Fine
• Pass

• Sources look good, and are predominantly English
• Pass

• Been stable for over a year
• Pass

• Media appropriately licensed
• Check looks good
• Pass

• on hold A few style things and a sentence that doesn't make sense. Kingsif (talk) 18:47, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: Kingsif (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Kingsif, appreciate the review! Believe I've addressed your above points in prose except for the national union parenthetical, which I kept as an aside. Let me know what you think and thanks for your time. czar 15:15, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: I find the lead still a bit too long, even with the wide montage - is there any way to remove one of the paragraphs? Kingsif (talk) 16:27, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingsif, done, though I think the lede is weaker for the loss of detail. czar 17:33, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The lead is just an overview, and it still hits the main points - the article body is for all the detail, and I think it's now got a good balance! Kingsif (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Well done