Talk:Streeterville/GA1

GA Review

This article is well-sourced and well-written, but I'm not sure it meets GA criteria for the following reasons:

Lead

• The second paragraph of the lead reads too much like an advertisement to me, "luxurious hotels, "fine restaurants", "world-renowned" universities" (there's only one university mentioned in the article, so I'm not sure why it's plural.
  • Fixed the lead for POV and the body for another university.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• The lead should almost certainly mention the fact that the "land" is essentially a reclaimed landfill, that's more interesting.
  • Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Mention the generally-accepted area of the neighborhood and its population, if possible. I think the area is large enough that the info is important.
  • Populations are measured at the census district level. In this case the Near North Side community area, which includes Streeterville, River North, and the Gold Coast. I don't know where to get a breakdown of the census district into its neighborhoods.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Ah ok. Sometimes there is other data from the city, etc. that provides that level of detail, but if the information doesn't exist than there's not much we can do about it. It's not essential, just nice to have. -epicAdam (talk) 01:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

History

• In the history section, need to better explain why the following is important and links into the story of Streeterville: "Silt and sand accumulated north of this pier. In 1857, Chicago Mayor John Wentworth evicted squatters on the land."
  • done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• The last paragraph of the history section is very choppy since it's just a string simple sentences.
  • How is that?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Not anymore. It's much better. :-) -epicAdam (talk) 01:41, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Today

• "some claim the boundary extends to Rush Street" who is some?
  • fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• "as are the number one and number eight tourist attractions in Chicago, Navy Pier and the John Hancock Observatory" rewrite to make it clear that they're the most-visited, for example, "The Navy pier, the most visited attraction in Chicago, and the John Hancock Observatory, the eighth-most visited..."
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:40, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Source needed: "In 2008, construction started on Chicago's new tallest skyscraper, the Chicago Spire. It will be located in the southeastern corner of the neighborhood, next to Lake Shore Drive, and is scheduled to be completed in 2011."
  • done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:30, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• Is there any reason why the red links are left in place? Per WP:Redlink, I would think they'd need to be removed.
  • I delinked Fox & Obel. However, you can see at List of tallest buildings in Chicago that most skyscrapers get articles also I expect articles for buildings on List of Registered Historic Places in Chicago and List of Chicago Landmarks. Thus, I think those redlinks are O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• "is also booming" editorial.
  • Is thriving better?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
    • I don't even know why it's necessary to comment about it. You can just say that the two building were built recently (provide the dates). I think it's best to just let the fact that they were built recently speak for itself. -epicAdam (talk) 01:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
      • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• "The 21st century has seen the successful develpment of much of the southern part of the neighborhood," besides development being spelled wrong, the article never mentions what the area was like before. The history section makes it sound as if the area was a trash dump occupied by a crazy civil war vet and his wife, and was then transformed into the land of skyscrapers. So what, exactly, needed redeveloping?
  • Clarified from source.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• "and it includes a Fox & Obel Market as well as some trendy offerings." editorial
  • Is that what you want?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• "Streeterville hosts the East Lake Shore Drive Historic District, the Old Chicago Water Tower District, part of the Michigan-Wacker Historic District and several individual landmarks." Provide the areas and significane of the historic districts. If they're important enough to be historic, they're probably worth a bit of an explanation.
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• "The neighborhood hosts the National Historic Landmark Jean Baptiste Point Du Sable Homesite." Again, flesh this out. People may not be familiar with the founder of Chicago.
  • Is this enough?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• The article is short enough that you need not rely on embedded lists like this: "National Register of Historic Places in the neighborhood include 257 East Delaware, 860-880 Lake Shore Drive Apartments, Drake Hotel, Fourth Presbyterian Church of Chicago, Navy Pier and the Palmolive Building. Other Chicago Landmarks in the neighborhood include Allerton Hotel, Farwell Building, McGraw-Hill Building, Perkins, Fellows & Hamilton Office and Studio, Tribune Tower, and the Woman's Athletic Club." Flesh out the information a bit.
• Any reason why the metric conversions are not provided for all the skyscrapers? This information may actually work better as an actual list or table as well.
  • Added conversions. I added lists.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• "Some of the notable buildings in the district that have not been designated are Wrigley Building and Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago." Any reason for this? And is there any source that says that they should be designated?
  • There is no indication that MCA should be designated. Wrigley is an important contributing property to the Michigan-Wacker Historic District. I think the MCA should be mentioned somehow as a cultural offering more than an architectural landmark. Any suggestions? Are you from Chicago?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:49, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• In the last paragraph, make sure you make the point that Streeterville is a major hotel locale, as opposed to starting off by listing the hotels (otherwise, it reads like an advertisement).
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Overall

• A photo caption mentions Gold Coast, but the area isn't mentioned anywhere else in the article...
  • It is now mentioned.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• Any way to get demographic information for the area? (Wealth, ethnic makeup, etc.) The information could be interesting, (although not required).
  • Like I mention above demographic info is based on the slightly larger census district.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Anything about parks or education besides just the fact that NU's medical and law schools are there?
  • I don't know anything about the parks, but I added the UofC's downtown Business school campus.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I also mentioned the Water Tower Campus of Loyola.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• The caption of the photo of the JH center needs a period (since it's a sentence) and the first letter needs to be capitalized.
  • Thanks. You can feel free to jump in and make a change like that.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Like always, Tony, great job but the article could still use a little work. I'll put on hold to give you time to work out the items above. Best always, epicAdam (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Second review

I just have one last issue with the article before GA. I'm still not sure from the reading the article what happened to the area between 1918 when the Streeters' claim was invalidated and the construction of most of the area. Most of the buildings mentioned didn't start construction until the 1960s, some not until the 1980s (actually, the construction dates of the buildings should probably be mentioned as well). Did the area just lie dormant? A bunch of empty lots? That's still not clear. Since this is such a small article on a relatively small neighborhood, having a complete chronological history is important, I think. The final sentence "Today, the district is home to some of the most expensive real estate in Chicago.[7]" seems like it should belong in the the "Today" section, since it's not really history. After that it seems to be good for GA. Best, epicAdam (talk) 16:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

How is that?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Good, at least the history section brings us through WWII now as opposed to leaving a 100-year gap! Only problem is, who is Arthur Rubloff?? And why is he redlinked? -epicAdam (talk) 23:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

He is named in the sources. I don't know anything that is not in the Near North Side and Mag Mile sources. I can delink him.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok. Just making sure he wasn't a mayor or somebody. The article says he's a developer, so I mentioned that in the article.

As for the final GA review. The article meets MoS standards, is well-sourced, has illustrative pictures, and is informative and broad in its subject matter, given the area's small size. I therefore think this article can be promoted to GA. Best, epicAdam (talk) 00:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)