Talk:Los Viagras

Los Viagras was nominated as a Social sciences and society good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 31, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

Crime and Criminal Biography: Organized crime Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Organized crime task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Mexico Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Larry Hockett (talk · contribs) 00:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will be happy to review this article. I notice that the nominator already considers this to be a Good Article, so we should make it official. Larry Hockett (Talk) 00:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have read through the entry and have some concerns.

The entry is quite short, only a bit longer than most people's minimum criteria for a Start-class article. It is not that we require a certain length of GAs, but with very short entries there can be issues with GA criterion 3 (broad in its coverage). We see some of those issues here, as some of the main aspects of the organization are not discussed. Examples:

There is only minimal information about the formation and criminal activities of the group. I am finding much more information about the group in reliable sources; the article could be expanded by at least several paragraphs.

There are several items listed in the infobox (like types of criminal activities - extortion) that are not even directly mentioned in the body of the article.

In the description of the origin of the group's name, there is a reference to "one of the younger brothers" but there is no mention of any brothers earlier in the entry. A more clear description is needed for the key people in the organization. (The Sierra Santana brothers are mentioned in the infobox, but I assume this should be Sierra Santa.)

Some of the allies and rivals listed in the infobox are not even mentioned in the body of the article.

The article mentions the 2019 arrest of one of the sicarios. Consider that the reference uses the wording jefe de sicarios. More importantly, what has happened in that case in the almost two years since the arrest?

The first reference from The Daily Beast has a lot more information about the history and operations of the organization. WP:RSP urges caution when using this publication for BLP claims, but there is some good info on the organization itself.

Right now, since so much information needs to be fleshed out in this entry, it makes the most sense to quick fail this nomination rather than continuing with a detailed review. I hope it comes back through GAN once these issues are addressed. Larry Hockett (Talk) 01:39, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]