Talk:Belasco Theatre/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 13:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

This looks like yet another well-written article on New York theatres submitted by Epicgenius and is therefore likely to be close to Good Article status. I will start a review soon. simongraham (talk) 13:40, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Comments

This is a stable and well-written article. 95.3% of authorship is by Epicgenius. It is currently ranked B class and was a DYK on 21 November.

• The article is of substantial length, 5,768 words of readable prose, plus a referenced list of notable productions and an infobox.
• It is written in a summary style, consistent with relevant Manuals of Style.
• Citations seem to be thorough.
• References appear to be from reputable sources.
• The images "File:The theatre through its stage door (1919) (14578179690).jpg" "The theatre through its stage door (1919) (14741856376).jpg" do not seem to have US PD tags.
  • I have now added {{PD-US-expired}} to these images. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• Other images have appropriate licensing and public domain or CC tags. Quite a few of the images are submitted by Epicgenius as own work. Nicely done!
  • Thanks. The only thing I had regrets about is that I wasn't able to take pictures of the interior, since I did not have tickets to the theater. Maybe I should contact the Shuberts in the future to arrange something. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
    • That sounds an excellent idea. I am sure they will be interested. simongraham (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• Earwig's Copyvio Detector identifies a 25.4% chance of copyright violation with the theatre's page on the Shubert Group website.
  • These seem to be mostly proper nouns, like the names of productions, as well as common phrases. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
    • That was my thought. simongraham (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• Should "stained glass" be hyphenated as MOS:HYPHEN?
  • When it's used as an adjective, such as "stained-glass panels", then yes. When it's used as a noun, such as "capitals of stained glass", then no. I have clarified this now. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
    • Thank you simongraham (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• "The Shubert Organization was to manage the theater, but the owners planned to demolish it some time in the future." Consider rephrasing.
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• "The game show show Take It or Leave It was also broadcast from the Belasco while it was an NBC studio." Remove the repeated word.
  • Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• "In Hedwig and the Angry Inch, Hedwig briefly discusses the history of the Belasco and references the ghost of Belasco, claiming that if the ghost appears on a show's opening night then the show is blessed." Consider a comma between "night" and "then" to mark the subclause.
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
• I see no other obvious spelling or grammar errors.

@Epicgenius: Another good piece of work - and a much larger article than the last one. Please ping me when you would like me to take another look. simongraham (talk) 09:51, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

@Simongraham: Thanks for the review. I have addressed all of these issues now. The prose size isn't that large, but the archive links for the references really inflate the article size for some reason. Epicgenius (talk) 14:13, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

@Epicgenius: Interesting; sometimes the best things don't come in the smallest packages. This looks ready to go. I will start my assessment. simongraham (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Assessment

The six good article criteria:

1. It is reasonable well written.

   the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;

   it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

   all inline citations are from reliable sources;

   it contains no original research;

   it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism;

   it stays ffocused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.

3. It is broad in its coverage

   it addresses the main aspects of the topic.

   it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. It has a neutral point of view.

   it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.

5. It is stable.

   it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

   images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Congratulations, Epicgenius. This article meets the criteria to be a Good Article.

Pass simongraham (talk) 21:03, 2 December 2021 (UTC)