Talk:Bolshoy Ice Dome/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Adam Cuerden (talk · contribs) 01:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a decent start, but it could use some improvement to get to GA. First of all, there are no pictures. I'm not sure, offhand, what the rules on Freedom of Panorama is in Russia, but surely we could fair use something if we had to.

Secondly, it was clearly written before the Olympics closed; it needs a lot of it changed to past tense.

Fixed. However, sentences like "It is the only venue in the Olympic Park" need to remain in present tense, as the arena is still standing and won't be taken down like other Olympic venues. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thirdly, it seems a bit light on information about the engineering and architecture. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record, a pic from the Commons was deleted because of copyvio. I'm not sure whether we could get it back on here as fair use. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for the engineering and the architecture, that's all the sources I was able to obtain. Given the fact that it's a relatively new building, I doubt whether I'll be able to find anymore sources (English-language ones, at least), as I've already comprehensively combed out Google, Google News, Newsbank, etc. And I have no knowledge of the Russian language, so it won't be possible for me to find sources from Russia, unfortunately. —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've raised the issue on commons:COM:AN - if it's a FOP issue, we can certainly fair use. If it's stolen, maybe it's best to leave well enough alone. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 08:34, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Having reviewed the other language Wikipedias, this is far above all of them. Going to get a quick second opinion, as it's somewhat short still, but leaning promote. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 10:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I asked a friend, and he says we need to find a free-licensed image, which can be uploaded to en-wiki claiming American FOP rules. I'm not sure that's quite valid, though. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 03:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden – I looked through Google Images filtering for re-use images, but couldn't find any of the exterior. Also, if that's not valid or possible to upload any other free image, I don't see why it should de-rail this GAC (seeing that Crisco wrote "I don't think it's ready for GAC"). After all, Mike Capel was promoted to featured article with not a single image (free or fair-use) appearing in the article. —Bloom6132 (talk) 06:51, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about the postage stamp? That's out of copyright, right? Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 13:26, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden – That's right. However, it kind of takes the term "artistic liberty" too far, since the building depicted on the stamp looks nothing like the Ice Dome (IMHO). Not to mention it is in low resolution. However, a stamp illustration is used in the Shayba Arena article, so I'll give it a try for this article. —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:55, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the end, I don't think I can reasonably hold GA status over lack of an image, so I think it'll be best to promote. Do try to find a free-licensed image, though, it would greatly improve the article. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 02:32, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]