Talk:Rock N Roll McDonald's

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Rock N Roll McDonald's 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.

Missing[edit]

This article should mention Wesley Willis somewhere. Chubbles 06:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

oh, it does already, doh. Chubbles 05:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Good article rating[edit]

Congratulations... I passed this article because it is succinct, to the point, well written and referenced well. Jazznutuva 14:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions for improvement[edit]

  • Expansion of the Neighborhood section
  • Expansion of the Rock & Roll section
  • Expansion of the captions to be more descriptive. See WP:CAP for examples.
  • Removal of defined size for thumbnailed pictures as outlined in WP:STYLE under section 16. Images.

Point out the irony[edit]

I assume this article is a joke, but many may miss the irony. -91.104.99.188 14:49, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Name change?[edit]

Has the name of the building changed in the last year? I am confused, as the Image:20070110 Rock & Roll McDonald's (3).JPG taken in January 2007 seems to suggest that the name is "Rock & Roll McDonald's". Seth Whales (talk) 19:18, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Rock N Roll McDonald's/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process.

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    Fine, I made a few tweaks for clarity
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Ok, I added subscription required to the Proquest cites
  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):
    I would suggest that there are two many images, but I will not de-list it on that basis.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    I am happy for this article to keep its GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)