The article provides a detailed overview of the Copa del Rey semifinals, including matchups, dates, and historical context. The details about the teams involved, match dates, and first-leg results align well with known facts. However, the specific dates mentioned for the second leg matches (April 1 and 2) fall on a Tuesday and Wednesday, which needs verification to ensure accuracy. The historical data about the Copa del Rey's significance and the clubs' trophy counts are generally accurate but should be cross-checked with official records to confirm their precision.

The article focuses primarily on the upcoming matches and the historical context of the Copa del Rey, offering a balanced view of the competition's importance to the clubs involved. However, it leans slightly towards the perspectives of the major clubs, Real Madrid and Barcelona, without delving deeply into the narratives or strategies of Real Sociedad and Atletico Madrid. Including more insights from these teams could provide a more rounded perspective.

The article is generally clear and well-structured, providing a logical flow of information from the match details to the historical context of the Copa del Rey. The language is accessible and neutral, making it easy for readers to understand the key points. However, the presentation could benefit from clearer separation of sections, such as using subheadings for different topics, to enhance readability.

The article appears to rely on reputable sources for its information, likely including official tournament announcements and historical records. However, it does not explicitly cite these sources, which makes it difficult to fully assess the credibility and reliability of the information presented. Providing clear attributions or references would enhance the perceived quality of the sources.

While the article offers a straightforward account of the semifinals, it lacks transparency regarding the sources of its information and the methodology behind its claims. There is no mention of how the information was gathered or any potential biases that might affect the reporting. Greater transparency in these areas would improve the reader's ability to assess the article's impartiality and accuracy.