Talk:El Apóstol

Did you know nomination

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: rejected by Amkgp (talk) 17:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[[File:|140px|An early caricature of President Yrigoyen designed for the film El Apostol.]]
An early caricature of President Yrigoyen designed for the film El Apostol.
  • ... that El Apóstol was the first animated feature film?
    • ALT1:... that El Apóstol was the first feature-length animated film?
    • ALT2:... that El Apóstol was the first full-length animated film?
    • ALT3:... that El Apóstol was the first full-length cartoon?
  • Reviewed: A QPQ is not required as this my fourth DYK nomination

Expanded by Lazman321 (talk) and Miniapolis (talk). Nominated by Lazman321 (talk) at 15:19, 4 February 2021 (UTC).[reply]

  • Lazman321, on DYK you have to nominate within seven days of the start of the expansion, and the expansion does need to be fivefold (the resulting article, as of seven days later, needs to have at least five times as many prose characters as before the expansion started). DYK is about newness (within seven days): newly created, newly expanded, and/or newly made a Good Article. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:43, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Passed. Paleface Jack (talk) 14:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Lazman321 (talk · contribs) 07:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Paleface Jack (talk · contribs) 15:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Emerging from dark corners of the void to review this article. More to follow.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the wait, at the moment I am burdened by homework. I'll try to get this done tomorrow. Lazman321 (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Take your time. I will continue my review today. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:27, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Paleface Jack: What do you mean by "Some citations need to be reorganized to fit correctly." Lazman321 (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lazman321 for example, if you have a piece of information and cite two sources it should read [1][2], some are out of order when you use multiple citations for a sentence or paragraph. You don't do it too often here but they are minor errors that can be easily fixed. Paleface Jack (talk) 01:40, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Paleface Jack: Okay, that's been addressed, along with the image size. Lazman321 (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lazman321 I will complete the review later today. Paleface Jack (talk) 17:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:

Lead

  • You don't necessarily need "using cutout animation" for the lead as the sentence before that is perfect as it is. Similarly, starting with "The film began production after..." can be simplified to "Production began after...", small simplifications tighten the structure and carried into the main body, though I will leave that up to you.

Plot

  • Pass

Production

  • The end portion of the section", likely red tones to represent flames and blue tones to represent floods" reads like conjecture. That probably should be removed as it is unnecessary. I have also noticed there are some names of people and whatnot that have articles on the spanish wikipiedia. I have linked some to save you the trouble but if you find any more while I wait for these changes, feel free to add them.

Release and other sections will be checked after these changes.--Paleface Jack (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Release and Legacy'

  • link La Razón.
  • Possibly add the current roundup for $1000 (adjusted for inflation).
  • Full names for the people involved are unnecessary, considering they are used earlier in the article. Just used the last name.
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.

Some citations need to be reorganized to fit correctly.

2b. 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).


2c. it contains no original research.

Good.

2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

Good.

  • Good.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.

Good.

3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Information on Cristiani's other film projects should be condensed (this should only be brief in mention).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Good.

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Good.

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.

All are free images.

6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

The image of the cutout should be smaller as it takes up a lot of article space.

7. Overall assessment.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination 2

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 History6042 talk 13:03, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... that El Apóstol is the first animated feature film?
Improved to Good Article status by Lazman321 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 17 past nominations.

Lazman321 (talk) 17:57, 28 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Policy compliance:

Hook eligibility:

  • Cited: Yes
  • Interesting: Yes
  • Other problems: Yes
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Recently promoted to GA, hook is cited and interesting, no other issues, qpq is done.

I think there is a copyvio here, the plot is verbatim copy of [1]. Copyvio report here. Kindly explain this and possibly rewrite the plot. Pinging @Lazman321: for answer. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 08:38, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Miminity: Actually, Letterboxd is the one plagiarizing Wikipedia. Letterboxd uses data from TMDB for its entries, and TMDB is user-generated, with each entry having its own edit history. Comparing the entry's edit histories between Wikipedia and TMDB, the plagiarism becomes obvious, as Wikipedia's plot section took on its modern form in November 2020, with a copyedit in January 2021, while the plot was added to TMDB in January 2025 (can't link because the site is blacklisted), which was, in turn, carried over to Letterboxd.
Okay - Approving Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 00:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TSventon (talk) 16:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous sentence

"Production began after the success of Cristiani and Valle's short film La intervención a la provincia de Buenos Aires, lasting either less than ten months or twelve months; accounts differ." This sentence confusingly combines several statements. What lasted ten or twelve months? The short film? The success of the short film? Or the production of El Apóstol? It should be split into two or more sentences. Nosferattus (talk) 15:24, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:El_Ap%C3%B3stol