Talk:Empire Building (Manhattan)/GA1

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.

---

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 20:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

• It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
• It contains copyright infringements -
• It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
• It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Links

• sources look good. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Prose

Lede

• There is one citation in the lede - doesn't seem like something we could use in prose. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done I moved it. epicgenius (talk) 17:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
• Is there a link for story? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done
• can we get some altext? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done
• Maybe consider {{TOC|3}}? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done

General

• The Empire Building has also been historically known as the U.S. Steel Company Building or O.B. Potter Trust Building - the bold in here is not required. Surely it doesn't meet WP:BOLDAVOID? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  • I put these in italics instead as these terms are former names which also redirect here. epicgenius (talk) 17:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
• might I suggest moving the arch image to the right? At the moment it covers a subsection, which isn't ideal. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done
• "Charles Sooysmith designed the foundation" - maybe mention who this is? 16:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Done

GA Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Review meta comments

• I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA and FA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definitely not mandatory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}
  • I'm going to go ahead and pass this - I've done a couple edits, but otherwise, it's in great shape. No reason to string this one out. Great job. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:13, 12 July 2020 (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.