Wikipedia:Peer review/Voxman Music Building/archive1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because.

@TheWarOfArt you haven't provided a reason. The article does however seem well written and well sourced, so I'm not sure what I can add. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think buildings/structures articles are much improved by a photograph.
In the absence of a photograph, or indeed with one, a building article really needs a description of the building itself. This article doesn't have one. Looking at images of the building online, it is certainly striking, and a description should be relatively easy to craft. This should include reference to architectural style, etc.
Something on the building's reception would be useful. Do architectural critics / its users (teachers/students/performers) like it or loathe it?

The lede is very short and will need expansion if your intention is GA.
Is an "academic building" a specific type? I know what you mean, but I'm not sure the "academic" isn't academic.

"located on the bank of the Iowa River" - does the Iowa River only have one bank? The left or the right?
"a new location for the new music building" - two "new"s in one sentence. An "alternative location"...?
"formally announced" - had it previously been announced "informally"? Suggest "announced" is sufficient.
"officially opened" - did it have a soft opening first? Suggest "opened" is sufficient.

"700-seat concert Hall, a 200-seat recital Hall and a 75-seat organ Hall" - in each case, I don't think the capitalisation of "Hall" is necessary.

Hope the above comments are of some use. KJP1 (talk) 18:23, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]