Talk:Yue Hwa Building

Yue Hwa Building has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 19, 2014. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Yue Hwa Building appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 September 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Yue Hwa Building used to house a popular boutique hotel, and was the tallest building in Singapore's Chinatown when it was completed in 1936?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2007/September.

Wikipedia

GA Review

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

Reviewer: QatarStarsLeague (talk · contribs) 15:06, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

1b. The needs to be expanded to appropriately summarize the entire article. See this page.
2b. Note, I have made a few changes to the in-line citations.
6a. I added an image.
7. If not for the insufficient lead, this article would pass. Until such time as the lead adequately summarizes the article, I can't pass the article.

@QatarStarsLeague: I have rewritten the lead section. How is the new lead section? It may need some copyediting. --Hildanknight (talk) 04:31, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is suitable; the article passes! QatarStarsLeague (talk) 05:19, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]