it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline;
✓
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
@
Epicgenius: Happy to confirm GA status but, before I do, some things to consider:
Might the History section be better placed before the Architecture section? Reading this, I felt the former could help to illuminate the latter.
Are there better images? In particular:
Is there a more comprehensive view for the main image? I understand the difficulties of shooting a large building in a built-up area but is there a historic picture that fits the bill?
Could images graphs or historic images be used to illustrate the development of the building?
Is it possible to add historic or current images of the building's interior and features?
@
CPClegg, thanks for taking up the review. In response to these points:
A lot of the details in the "History" section relate to things that are first mentioned in the "Architecture" section. Personally, I'm not sure.
Good images of this building are indeed very hard to come by, since it's a tall building on a narrow street, surrounded by other tall buildings. Of the few images that do depict a comprehensive view of the building, they are mostly historic pictures, such as the images on
pages 16, 18, and 20 of this report. I can look for more historic images tomorrow. I did not come across any freely licensed images of the interior, but I may need to look for these as well.
@
Epicgenius, great. Let me know how you get on with images and I can finalise things. The link you shared looks like it has a lot of good public domain stuff.
@
CPClegg, unfortunately it seems that I totally forgot about this. Sorry about the long wait. Are the public domain images (or lack thereof) the only issue you have with this article? –
Epicgenius (
talk)
12:57, 15 August 2022 (UTC)reply
I did not. I will add them soon, but the issue is with licensing. The
source in question has several images taken before 1927, but I cannot be sure that the images were published before 1927 (and thus in the public domain). –
Epicgenius (
talk)
04:33, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply
it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline;
✓
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);
@
Epicgenius: Happy to confirm GA status but, before I do, some things to consider:
Might the History section be better placed before the Architecture section? Reading this, I felt the former could help to illuminate the latter.
Are there better images? In particular:
Is there a more comprehensive view for the main image? I understand the difficulties of shooting a large building in a built-up area but is there a historic picture that fits the bill?
Could images graphs or historic images be used to illustrate the development of the building?
Is it possible to add historic or current images of the building's interior and features?
@
CPClegg, thanks for taking up the review. In response to these points:
A lot of the details in the "History" section relate to things that are first mentioned in the "Architecture" section. Personally, I'm not sure.
Good images of this building are indeed very hard to come by, since it's a tall building on a narrow street, surrounded by other tall buildings. Of the few images that do depict a comprehensive view of the building, they are mostly historic pictures, such as the images on
pages 16, 18, and 20 of this report. I can look for more historic images tomorrow. I did not come across any freely licensed images of the interior, but I may need to look for these as well.
@
Epicgenius, great. Let me know how you get on with images and I can finalise things. The link you shared looks like it has a lot of good public domain stuff.
@
CPClegg, unfortunately it seems that I totally forgot about this. Sorry about the long wait. Are the public domain images (or lack thereof) the only issue you have with this article? –
Epicgenius (
talk)
12:57, 15 August 2022 (UTC)reply
I did not. I will add them soon, but the issue is with licensing. The
source in question has several images taken before 1927, but I cannot be sure that the images were published before 1927 (and thus in the public domain). –
Epicgenius (
talk)
04:33, 18 September 2022 (UTC)reply