Talk:Joffrey Tower/GA1

Joffrey Tower GA Reassessment

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

GA Sweeps: On hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to determine if the article should remain a Good article. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. However, in reviewing the article, I have found there are several issues that needs to be addressed.

"It will now, like the ballet company, be named after Robert Joffrey, co-founder of the company." Has it already been named after him? It looks like this statement needs to be updated. There are also other statements throughout the article that are outdated.
Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:42, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"The building was originally scheduled for completion in December 2007 official renaming and company move accompanying the completion." I'm not able to follow this sentence, it looks like it needs to be reworded.
Should be clearer now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"The September 15 event also included an auction of items such as $25,000 Van Cleef and Arpels diamond earrings." Since "items" is used, more than one item needs to be mentioned. This may be confusing with the earrings but they are a single pair (unless multiple pairs were auctioned). Either include other items at the auction or reword to "item".
I only see the word once followed by an example.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reading the sentence it wouldn't sound very clear if another noun was used (ex: "... an auction of items such as car.") To reword it, the statement could be rewritten "... an auction of items such as necklaces, bracelets, and earrings." (hypothetical, not sure what was also at the auction) or "... an auction of multiple items, including a $25,000 Van ...". --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:07, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I misunderstood the point and it is now clear.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:10, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I reworded it a little bit more. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~"Another failed plan was the subsequent 33-story Randolph Court plan." "plan" is redundant here.~~
Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~The gallery needs to be removed. Choose the most relevant images and remove the rest.~~ I tagged all of the images with {{Move to Commons}} so if they are uploaded there, a link can be provided to their respective article/category.
Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~There are a few dead links that need to be fixed. The Internet Archive can help.~~
Deadlinks fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article covers the topic well and has an excellent source of free images. I will leave the article on hold for seven days, but if progress is being made and an extension is needed, one may be given. If no progress is made, the article may be delisted, which can then later be renominated at WP:GAN. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Sweeps: Kept

Good work addressing the issues. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. Altogether the article is well-written and has a great source of free images. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for all of the online sources. If you get a chance, try and upload the images at Commons so a central link can be provided for all of the images. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]