Talk:One Astor Plaza/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MaxnaCarta (talk · contribs) 03:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Epicgenius, you are very close to having this article pass GA. I just have some notes here, please let me know when done.

Please run [this script] and fix some of the duplicate links per MOS:DUPLINK. Some examples are Broadway, Palladium Times Square, Minskoff Theatre, Ben Schlanger, Sam Minskoff and Sons.
Reference 99 has pp 721,722. Now as a lawyer in Australia, this is actually correct for my citation style. 721-722 is however I think the MOS here? Please check and get back to me on if you think this complies.
I have had some feedback that the article is technical, but I think it is fine myself. If you think there are any areas you could make your language read more easily, please fix these.

Thanks Epicgenius, it has so far been a real pleasure making your article my very first GA review. I appreciate your patience while I sought some assistance from an experienced reviewer. Looking forward to passing this for you. MaxnaCarta (talk) 10:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius please can you confirm you are aware of this feedback? And ETA on when it can be addressed? Thanks! MaxnaCarta (talk) 08:15, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius in the interests of closing this off, I made the adjustments myself but please do continue to watch the article and improve it so that one day perhaps it can reached featured status. Congratulations! it will be listed as GA shortly.

@MaxnaCarta: Thanks for the review. Unfortunately I didn't see the feedback until you pinged me (since I received the ping at about 4:00 am NYC time, I didn't see it until now). I think your changes are all good. Epicgenius (talk) 13:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius all good, I’m in Australia. Nice to meet you. MaxnaCarta (talk) 19:49, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

GA Criteria

GA Criteria:

1
1.a Y - Prose is very well written and clear to understand. No issues with spelling or grammar.

1.b Y - Good lead section. Layout makes sense. Excellent compliance with MOS.
2
2.a Y - References are presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.

2.b Y - Citations are from reliable sources. Nothing controversial that could be challenged, and claims are consistently sourced.

2.c Y - No original research. Very well and consistently sourced.

2.d - Y - Copyvio report shows no concerns
3
3.a Y

3.b Y
4
4.a Y
5
5.a - Y
6
6.a - Y - primary photo taken and uploaded by nominator. Other images all have an appropriate CC licence.

6.b Y
No DAB links Y
No Dead links Y - all links are live.

Overall pass Y