Talk:Pui Tak Center

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Pui Tak Center 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
November 13, 2009 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Illinois (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Chicago (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Pui Tak Center GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Gbern3 (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    I found two sentences where you need inline citations. In the lead: [1]The building was purchased by the Chinese Christian Union Church (CCUC) for $1.4 million and renamed the in 1993. Comment: You also need to specify what the building was renamed to. Also, this is not something that will hold up the article's promotion but do you really need to wikilink CCUC when the page doesn't exist? [2]In the History section: Starting this trend, the On Leong Chinese Merchants Association appealed to deed-holder and former Illinois State's Attorney Jacob J. Kern to hire architect H. J. Swanson to design a building large enough to house 15 stores, 30 apartments and office space on the 200 block of West Cermak Avenue.
    I don't normally put in-line citations in the lead. It is just a stylistic choice. But that specific sentence is used again in the body of the article, and it has a reference there! And wow, I don't know how I missed that error in the lead. I added what the building's name was changed to. As for the church link, I intended on maybe making the article one day, but it doesn't look like I'll get to it soon, so I just removed the red link for now. I also added the citation for your second sentence. --TorsodogTalk 21:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
    I didn't catch that sentence in the body, my mistake. Thank you for making the other changes. // Gbern3 (talk) 02:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Just cite those two facts (or remove the sentences altogether) and I'll be happy to promote the article. Leave a message for me on my talk page when completed.
    Fixes have been made. Changing status from "On Hold" to "Pass" and promoting the article. // Gbern3 (talk) 02:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)