Talk:Colonial Plaza

Colonial Plaza has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 21, 2019. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Colonial Plaza appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 October 2018 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that when the Colonial Plaza shopping center opened in 1956 in Orlando, Florida, its sidewalks were tinted green to reduce glare?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2018/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Colonial Plaza.

Wikipedia

Florida Mid‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shopping Centers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shopping Centers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of enclosed shopping malls, outdoor shopping centers, and dead malls 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.Shopping CentersWikipedia:WikiProject Shopping CentersTemplate:WikiProject Shopping CentersShopping center articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Colonial Plaza/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ed! (talk · contribs) 16:26, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at this one. —Ed!^(talk) 16:26, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria) (see here for this contributor's history of GA reviews)

It is reasonably well written:
Pass External links, dup links and dab links look good. Copyvio detector returns green.
It is factually accurate and verifiable:
Source Spotcheck Refs 1, 4 and 48 all line up with what it cited in the article.
It is broad in its coverage:
Not Yet
History
Any word on site selection criteria? Why was this land selected? Assuming the market dictated some population growth. Modern site selection for instance would indicate population/households/income in the 1, 3 and 5 mile radius from the site and would be pretty easy to find. Else, it might be useful to add what the population growth was in the area at the time and how this justified a mall.

I added a bit more information on this front.

I see architect and construction manager noted, who was the original developer? And property manager?

Added as much info on this as I could find.

What was the overall square footage of the original building? At the moment only includes a few of the anchor tenants.

Any word on the number of overall retail pads in the original development?

I found another article saying 20 acres and "over two dozen" shops, which I have added to the article.

What was the cost of the 61-62 expansion?

Added.

Any traffic data for this initial history on the article?

Closest I found was that it led to more traffic lights on Colonial Drive.

Did the initial construction and first expansion of the mall contribute to nearby development of other retail strips and residential properties?

I couldn't really find anything saying as such, but I did find an article noting a few retail developments built on the lot after the 1962 expansion. Most of the growth seems to have been focused on the 1970s.
1970s-1980s
What's the cost of the 72 expansion?

Added. It was in the headline.

"which was compounded when a fire broke out in the mall and destroyed the merchandise of four stores." -- Any more detail on the fire, date, location, stores damaged or cause or cost of damage?

"the renovations led to an increase in mall traffic and sales." -- Can either be quantified? If not, I would avoid weasel wording of the next sentence, "However, some merchants in the South Mall noted that their sales lagged"

This book has some material that could be added [1]

Added some information from this book.
1990s
"J.J. Gumberg Co., then-owners of the mall, " -- When did they buy it and for what price?

I couldn't find any information on this. They are mentioned as owner as early as 1982, which I have reflected.

"a massive decline of inline tenants and shopper traffic throughout the first few years of the 1990s." -- How did the occupancy rate change in this time?

Added.
1995-Present
Could be added that it's fallen to eighth largest retail property in the market: [2]

Added.

Weingarten is a public REIT, so there is a lot of data available on this mall that could be added. I note for instance its latest annual report filing has that the mall is 100 percent leased and also includes a lot of very relevant data on mall operating costs and land/improvement value: [3]

The SNL.com link you gave me is a 404. The claim of 100% occupancy is contradicted by the current site plan, which shows two vacancies. Most of what I did find of this sort was sales data that didn't seem encyclopedic in nature, or was paywalled and of use only to business investors.

Demographics and traffic counts from Ref 1 could be added.

Done.
It follows the neutral point of view policy:
Pass No problems there.
It is stable:
Pass No problems there.
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate:
Any chance for an aerial shot or some kind of map?
Working on a map of the 1980s-early 1990s layout. Not sure where I'd find a free aerial photo.
Other:
On Hold Pending a few suggestions and additions. —Ed!^(talk) 20:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ed!: Will look this over tomorrow afternoon. Long day at work and can't focus right now. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:12, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ed!: Doing... Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:10, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ed!: Done I think I have acknowledged every concern brought up here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:58, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic, so I think you've added the relevant details necessary for the article to get to GA status. I note about an 8Kb increase in content there which s massively helpful. So, will Pass for GA now. Thanks for the work! —Ed!^(talk) 15:03, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]