Talk:Ridgedale Center

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ridgedale Center article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Ridgedale Center was one of the Art and architecture good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 25, 2016	Good article nominee	Listed
September 6, 2019	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Minnesota Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Shopping Centers Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 11:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

Well-written:

With the issues listed below addressed, this article now fully complies with MOS policies concerning grammar, along with general layout/formatting. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:56, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article is well-referenced with reputable sources; the content is not left in want of citations. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article appears to cover all encyclopedic aspects of its topic for which reliable information could be accessed. All areas of the topic are balanced and devoid of cruft. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

The article keeps a consistently neutral tone, throughout. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Since it's creation a near 9-1/2 years ago, there has been no disruptive editing within this article. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

As mentioned on the information page for the image used in the article, it is (at present) irreplaceable with regards to the purpose it serves, and is furthermore adequately equipped with license and fair-use rationale. Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Comments

"2007–present: Renovations and Nordstrom opens": Nothing in this section mentions that a Nordstrom outlet has officially opened at this mall, to-date. Since the concept of a Nordstrom store is still inherently central to this section, and in keeping with the titles of the sections above it, I would suggest omitting "opens" from the header.

Done Carbrera (talk) 15:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I find myself confused by the line, "... these plans allowed both Macy's current anchor of 202,000 square feet (19,000 m²) to combine into one larger, 286,000 square feet (27,000 m²) location." Where does the "both" tie in? If Macy's had 202,000 square feet before the combination, where did the other 84,000 square feet come in? Herein dwells the greatest dictionary ever composed! (talk) 09:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done I have reworded the line accordingly. Carbrera (talk) 15:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]