Talk:1920 Xalapa earthquake

1920 Xalapa earthquake (final version) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which on 3 April 2023 was archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

1920 Xalapa earthquake has been listed as one of the Natural sciences 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 30, 2022. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1920 Xalapa earthquake article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

A fact from 1920 Xalapa earthquake appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 November 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the first probable scientific study of aftershocks following a destructive earthquake was undertaken after the 1920 Xalapa earthquake?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1920 Xalapa earthquake.

Wikipedia

Earthquakes High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Earthquakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of earthquakes, seismology, plate tectonics, and related subjects 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.EarthquakesWikipedia:WikiProject EarthquakesTemplate:WikiProject EarthquakesWikiProject Earthquakes articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mexico Mid‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:1920 Xalapa earthquake/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bdonjc (talk · contribs) 06:04, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Overall, this is a well-written and well-covered article. There were a few spelling and grammatical errors, but I fixed them. Bdonjc^talk 04:57, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Rlink2 (talk) 00:36, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

To T:DYK

... that the first scientific study of aftershocks following a destructive earthquake was undertaken after the 1920 Xalapa earthquake? Source: [1]
- Reviewed:
- Comment: QPQ not required since this is my third DYK nomination. Full text can be found on ResearchGate.

Improved to Good Article status by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk). Self-nominated at 01:28, 31 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: @Dora the Axe-plorer: Good article. Going to approve in good faith due to foreign language sources. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The source says "probably the first aftershock study", but the hook assert this as a known fact. I think we need to tweak the wording in the hook. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:06, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- ALT blurb 1 ... that the first probable scientific study of aftershocks following a destructive earthquake was undertaken after the 1920 Xalapa earthquake?

Proposed the alt blurb. Will change the article as well.Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 00:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]