This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles
This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool articles
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've just looked at this article following a suggestion that its WikiProject NRHP rating be reassessed. By the WikiProject's quality standards, I don't think we can justify a rating higher than "stub".
Per the "More detailed criteria" at the quality scale, a start-class article includes "[a]t least one important aspect of the topic covered in reasonable detail". I don't see that here. The discussion of architecture consists of two short sentences. The discussion of history notes that the building was constructed in 1909–1911, then jumps to 1989. Neither of these discussions seems to satisfy the "reasonable detail" criterion; so by the WikiProject's standards, I think that the article must keep its stub ranking. — Ammodramus (talk) 12:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
