Talk:1909 Benavente earthquake

1909 Benavente 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: March 8, 2025. (Reviewed version).

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

Portugal Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal 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.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal

Low

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

Portugal To-do:

Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

Improve key articles to Good article

Improve

Review

Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).

Requests

See Requested articles

Assess

Help assessing articles.

Need images

Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia

Wikify

Vote:

Watch this list — Edit this list

GA review

Passed. Dawnseeker2000 21:43, 8 March 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:1909 Benavente earthquake/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · contribs) 15:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Dawnseeker2000 (talk · contribs) 20:57, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start on this one today. Dawnseeker2000 20:57, 7 March 2025 (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, as shown by a source spot-check.
a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
You might consider adding other sources for the death toll. The only existing take on the matter is from Jorge Talixa, a reporter at Público, a Portuguese newspaper. I'll step out on a limb and say that he's not likely an authoritative figure for earthquake death tolls. On top of that, J. Johnson (a highly knowledgeable and former WP:Earthquakes editor) once commented on the use of newspapers. I tend to fall back on this advice, even if we aren't necessarily using them for (as he mentioned) for seismological aspects. Utsu 2002 and the NGDC are both reporting just 30 deaths for the event.
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:

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.

Utsu CAT

@Dawnseeker2000 is the Utsu Catalog working for you? I've tried to specify some fields but the search seems broken. Or am I doing it incorrectly? Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 15:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the GA review about 30 deaths Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 15:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Utsu is one of the catalogs in PAGER-CAT and there should be a copy of it in the catalog folder that I sent you. Do you have access to those? Dawnseeker2000 20:04, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the PAGER-CAT has Utsu, thanks Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 03:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, yes. The web version is working. I put 1909 in both year fields, then limited the results to Portugal. Dawnseeker2000 20:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]