Jump to content

Talk:Eliel Saarinen's Tribune Tower design/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Moswento (talk · contribs) 08:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mr Bink! I'll have a look at this one, hopefully today, or tomorrow if not. Looking forward to it! Moswento talky 08:03, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Overall
  • This was a thoroughly enjoyable article to review. The prose is written in an elegant and interesting style; the article covers all the main aspects of the design - there is possibility for expansion, but nothing major missing; the descriptions in the table are a good length and link each building to the topic well; the images all check out; the sources are all of a good quality and used accurately. A few minor comments on the text, and then I'll be happy to promote (unless you upset me in the meantime). Good work! Moswento talky 12:42, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • Could you perhaps clarify in the lead that this was a competition to design new headquarters, and that the winning design was actually built? This would make more sense of the word "yet" in the second sentence
Background
  • "The prominent Tribune Tower competition was held" - I realise the year is mention in the lead and infobox, but it seems odd not to say here "held in 1922"
  • "the major US metropolitan newspaper." - This makes it sound like you're not allowed to name the paper for legal reasons! I see no reason not to mention the paper by name again
  • "Many observers felt that Saarinen's simplified yet soaring setback tower was the most appropriate entry, and his novel modernist design influenced many subsequent architectural projects" - I wonder if this sentence is redundant, given that you tell us both things again later in the section?
  • "he said that he took" - is the "he said" necessary? Saarinen seems like a trustworthy fellow.
  • "further extending its logic of verticality." - is there a way of putting this differently, i.e. more accessibly?
  • "Mercurio points to the Tribune Tower competition entry from American architect Bertram Goodhue as having much the same modernist features as Saarinen's, with dramatic setbacks and a more pronounced simplification of the exterior, with less ornamentation, thus a better example of modernism." - This is quite a cumbersome sentence. Could you shorten or split? (I tried to think of an e.g. but struggled)
  • I'm wondering if you should break up the 'Background' section into a 'Background' and 'Reception'/'Assessment' section. The last two paragraphs don't really fit the 'Background' title in my view. Happy to discuss this point.
Buildings influence
  • Why no description of the David Stott building? It might feel left out...
Response