Talk:Rizalito David

Latest comment: 11 hours ago by Gommeh in topic GA review

Did you know nomination

edit

Created by TheNuggeteer (talk). Number of QPQs required: 3. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 38 past nominations.

🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:37, 18 June 2026 (UTC).Reply

  • @TheNuggeteer: (not sure why I pinged you at Balon as well...) Both long enough; David is new to mainspace and Montemayor is a GA. Both QPQs complete. Earwig picks up many WP:LIMITED phrases, though I'm not convinced it rises to WP:CLOP. I am not seeing "in front of" in the article and the hook could easily be trimmed to "endorsed a different presidential candidate to his running mate". (The hook itself is marginally interesting; not so dull that I'd reject it, but the time to propose ALTs is now.) Also, backlog mode.--Launchballer 16:13, 18 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
I just realised that the hook doesn't say Philippine and probably should. If you're alright with ALT1a: ... that 2022 Philippine vice presidential election candidate Rizalito David endorsed a different presidential candidate to his running mate?, I'll approve it.--Launchballer 20:41, 21 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Launchballer: looks good! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 11:49, 23 June 2026 (UTC)Reply
Let's roll.--Launchballer 11:50, 23 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

GA review

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

Nominator: TheNuggeteer (talk Â· contribs) 05:41, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Gommeh (talk Â· contribs) 14:03, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

I will get this for GARC. Comments to come in the next day or so. Gommeh (talk đŸŽź sign) 14:03, 27 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

GA criteria commentary

edit
  • The only image in the article is in the public domain.
  • Article looks pretty stable with regard to edit warring and vandalism. I do see someone raised notability concerns on June 10. Notability is not a part of the GA criteria, however, per WP:GANOT.
  • This was when I accidentally created the article in mainspace unfinished; no other issues have been addressed since/
  • Earwig indicates a 45.9% likelihood of a copyvio, but from what I can see a decent amount of the flagged phrases are either attributed quotes, job titles or other things of that type. Please have a look at the link and, if something needs to be rephrased, please do so.
  • Tried my best to fix, but most phrases are limited.
  • Sources appear to be reliable for the most part.

Article commentary

edit
  • He entered University of the Philippines Los Baños and was a staff of the Liberal Party-PDP–Laban tandem This will likely need to be explained briefly in the prose of the article if it is important enough to mention in the lead, even though the tandem is mentioned in the body. What was the tandem?
  • Just changed to a general explanation
  • He said that his grandfather taught him basic life manners. Is this really necessary? I feel like most people's close family (in theory) teach them basic manners.
  • Removed
  • When he was 17, he joined the underground movement, fighting for a "just and human society based on ideology," What is the underground movement?
  • He then entered the University of the Philippines Los Baños, serving as the research assistant at the Program on Environmental Sciences and Management and an instructor at the Department of Social Sciences and Graduate School Is it necessary to mention the specific names of the schools? I feel like it may be sufficient to just name the positions and topics, e.g. "research assistant in environmental sciences and management".
  • Merged
  • He subsequently became the chief of the Research and Monitoring Staff of the Liberal Party-PDP–Laban tandem in the 1992 Philippine general election [...] and the head executive assistant and concurrent director for political affairs for Senator Robert Jaworski from 1998 to 2004. This sentence is very long, please try to cut it.
  • Cut
  • During his stints under Tatad, Perez, and Jaworski, he worked on the Clean Air Act, Solid Waste Management Act, Clean Water Act, and the Philippine Mining Law. I highly doubt anyone from outside the Philippines would know what these laws are specifically, other than the general topics which are made obvious by their names.
  • Changed
  • In the late 2010s, David was the executive director of Prolife Philippines. Same - what is Prolife Philippines?
  • 100 thousand pesos should not be written this way. I would change to using {{Currency}}.
  • In an interview with the Philippine Daily Inquirer, The name of the newspaper should be italicized. No need to wikilink as this is already done earlier.
  • If he was elected, he planned to place his Catholic faith in the center of governance and reflect it in laws and programs. [...] In his speech, he said that he would espouse Catholic ways in governance and would not file a disqualification case against Poe if she runs for president. Did he ever specify how he would do so?
  • In January 2016, the Supreme Court of the Philippines (SC) upheld David's disqualification from the presidential polls. What did they say specifically? Additionally, I'm not sure about using the abbreviation "SC". That's not common here in the US; is this true in the Philippines? That is to say, do they commonly use "SC" to refer to their Supreme Court? I should also add that in the lawsuit section the full term "Supreme Court" is used; these should be the same across the article - you should either use the full term or the acronym and stick with it throughout the article.
  • The header for the David v. Poe section should be italicized.
  • Rizalito then filed an appeal with the Supreme Court. What specifically did he say in the appeal?

Ping me when these are addressed and I can move on to a source spot check and, if necessary, a second run-through of the article. Gommeh (talk đŸŽź sign) 14:16, 29 June 2026 (UTC)Reply