Talk:Raul Meza Jr.

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: promoted by SL93 talk 19:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that serial killer Raul Meza Jr. began using drugs at age eight?

• Source: https://www.kxan.com/investigations/in-depth-history-of-austins-accused-serial-killer-raul-meza/

• • Reviewed:

Created by Swinub (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Swinub★ 04:18, 18 November 2024 (UTC).

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: Article meets all the relevant guidelines, hook is cited to a brand of MSNBC which is considered reliable by consensus. Hook is interesting, nice work! It is a wonderful world (talk) 22:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• I have pulled the hook over WP:DYKBLP concerns. Regardless of the fact that he is primarily known for negative reasons, unduly focusing on a negative aspect about a living person violates the rule (it would be due to have a hook about his murders, but not about something he did as a kid and what he wasn't known for). A new hook will need to be proposed. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:58, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that when the serial killer Raul Meza Jr. was asked if he was apologetic, he asked: "What's the use if a person will not accept it?"?--Launchballer 18:57, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Sounds better. @It is a wonderful world: Can you please check ALT1? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 16:44, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

I like that hook a lot, but I think "he stated" would be better than "he asked", to avoid the repetition of "asked". Also, I don't think it needs a double question mark? It is a wonderful world (talk) 17:03, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

ALT1a: ... that when the serial killer Raul Meza Jr. was asked if he was apologetic, he replied: "What's the use if a person will not accept it?".--Launchballer 17:15, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Probably ready for a new check. Courtesy ping to Swinub in case they weren't aware of the above discussion and the new hook. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:19, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

This one is better. Swinub★ 06:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

• We should be good to go with ALT1a, with the rest of the review per It's a wonderful world. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

GA review

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:Raul Meza Jr./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Staryu (talk · contribs) 14:48, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk · contribs) 12:22, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Taking this review. Expect preliminary comments soon. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 12:22, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

You could ditch the citations in the lede, unless ofc the statements are likely to be challenged. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 14:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the review. I've removed the citations from the lead. Staryu★ 19:03, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

@Nineteen Ninety-Four guy, I've made the corrections. The only one I was unsure of is the part about MOS:PERCENT, as from what I'm reading, it does not say there was anything wrong with it. Though I've changed it to "a quarter." Staryu★ 21:44, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	*"Raul Meza Jr. (born October 14, 1960) is an American serial killer who was found guilty for of the murder of Kendra Page" He is suspected in of around ten other homicides." Follow Austin Police Department with its acronym enclosed in parentheses "Meza was sentenced to prison for 20 years for the crime but was released early on parole in February 1981." Precede but with a comma "The initial autopsy was inconclusive, and although there was evidence that she could have died due to strangulation, it was determined that she had died from an alcohol-related accident, as there was no solid evidence of murder, and she She was known to have an alcohol addiction." (Split run-on sentence). "A sexual assault kit during Lofton's autopsy provided a match to Meza's DNA in 2020, but nothing Still, nothing was done with this information, and no explanation as to why was provided by police." We'd better split this. Also, what does and no explanation as to why was provided by police mean? Because it reads like it's a typo. "On May 26, Meza called Austin police, demanding demanded to speak with an APD homicide detective over the phone." "During the call" Follow call with a comma "80-year-old" "Eighty-year-old" (never begin a sentence with numerals) Resolved
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	*In the home were large amounts of dried blood in several rooms and a bloody kitchen knife. [...] Inside the truck were boots covered in what appeared to be blood." Stylistically, this reads more like something out of a true crime blog than an encyclopedia. Revise to make these more encyclopedic in tone while ensuring the source supports them. "and seems a strong candidate at this point for a life of recidivism or... suicidal inclinations." Insert   in the source code preceding the ellipsis (...) "25%" WP:PERCENT "sexual assault kit" -> Rape kit Resolved
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.
	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).	Article is cited to reliable, secondary sources
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	No copyvio and signs of AI writing detected upon scrutiny.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Everything available about the subject is summarized per Wikipedia's policy
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.	*Mug shot has a detailed fair-use rationale with the relevant templates *File:Jane Langford Elementary School Austin.jpg is licensed under CC BY 4.0
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Issues have been resolved. Marking as a pass. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 06:01, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

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.