Lena Horne Theatre 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. | |||||||||||||
Lena Horne Theatre is part of the Active Broadway theaters series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
January 16, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in its first two decades, the
Mansfield Theatre had only two "outstanding hits", both performed by all-Black casts? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
Theleekycauldron (
talk) 07:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
5x expanded by Epicgenius ( talk). Self-nominated at 23:34, 30 December 2021 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
---|
|
QPQ: - Not done
Overall:
Nice work! Everything looks good to me, just awaiting QPQ. ALT0, the first hook, is the most interesting to me, though I am approving all proposed hooks.
DanCherek (
talk) 22:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
ALT0 to T:DYK/P3 without image
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Rlink2 ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
This was one of the first GAs on the list so I'm also going to review this one. I think I work best when I work multiple passes through the article, because each time I will see something I didn't the first time.
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
The facade is divided into two sections.it should be
The facade is divided into two sections: ..... It seems more natural to me, but not a big deal. What's the standard for numbering? I see in the "1960s and 1970s" section there is one sentence that says
five-performanceand another that says
176-performance. Is it all supposed to be all Arabic numerals (so 5-performance instead of five-performance)? Or am I missing something.
difficult-to-understand terminology and symbols.in the lede and that
Where uncommon terms are essential, they should be placed in context, linked and briefly defined. Again, maybe its different for theatre articles, so please let me know if that is the case. Regarding the layout, it looks good to me. I will say, that to me, the title
Broadway revivalis a bit unintuitive. I "get" what you are trying to do with it, but I feel like it could use a better name. Correct me if I am wrong however. There are also red links, is that intended?
Other design featureslooks like it was cut off from another part of the article (
Next to the boxes is a three-centered proscenium arch.). I would say that
There is a three-centered prosenium arch next to the boxes.. In general, there are many other sentences that seem "chopped". Not saying its a bad thing, or that it should be changed, just something to note.
The theater's interior was refurbished in 2000.belongs there, given that there is only 3 sentences about it in the actual article. Could be wrong, let me know if I am.
Stage house sectionthere is only one citation. I am assuming that one citation has the info to back up everything in that paragraph, right?
Overall, good job.
Rlink2 (
talk) 18:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
What's the standard for numbering?- per MOS:NUMERAL "Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words." So that is what I have done.
MOS:INTRO states that we should avoid "difficult-to-understand terminology and symbols." in the lede and that "Where uncommon terms are essential, they should be placed in context, linked and briefly defined"- Sometimes I have difficulty determining when a term is difficult to understand for others, especially in architecture but also in other subjects. Are there specific terms you are confused about? I can add a brief explanation to these.
I will say, that to me, the title "Broadway revival" is a bit unintuitive.- This is another thing I've found to be pretty common. Until you brought it up, it hadn't occurred to me that "Broadway revival" could be confusing, so I've added a link.
I do have some questions: for the content below the header Stage house section there is only one citation. I am assuming that one citation has the info to back up everything in that paragraph, right?- Correct.
My only quibble is the short paragraph below "history" - not immedaitely obvious what the general situation in Times Square and productions has to do with this particular theatre.- Yes, I will do that soon. Generally, this is meant to show that Times Square's theater district was well-established by the time the Chanins came around.
but you did go into alot of detail, even into the type of brick used for the building and almost every play performed there.- Heh, yeah, I did go into quite a bit of detail about the plays, but this is typical of GAs on Broadway theaters (about half of them are now good articles). I tended to mention only the notable productions described in at least one of the bibliographical sources. As for the brick, that's typical of my architectural articles as well.
See if you can find any free images of inside the building, it would be nice but certainly not required.- I am actually in the process of looking for these images right now. This theater was completed in 1926, so any images of the theater published that year have just recently fallen out of copyright. Epicgenius ( talk) 00:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Lena Horne Theatre 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. | |||||||||||||
Lena Horne Theatre is part of the Active Broadway theaters series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
January 16, 2022. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in its first two decades, the
Mansfield Theatre had only two "outstanding hits", both performed by all-Black casts? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
Theleekycauldron (
talk) 07:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
5x expanded by Epicgenius ( talk). Self-nominated at 23:34, 30 December 2021 (UTC).
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px. |
---|
|
QPQ: - Not done
Overall:
Nice work! Everything looks good to me, just awaiting QPQ. ALT0, the first hook, is the most interesting to me, though I am approving all proposed hooks.
DanCherek (
talk) 22:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
ALT0 to T:DYK/P3 without image
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Rlink2 ( talk · contribs) 18:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
This was one of the first GAs on the list so I'm also going to review this one. I think I work best when I work multiple passes through the article, because each time I will see something I didn't the first time.
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
The facade is divided into two sections.it should be
The facade is divided into two sections: ..... It seems more natural to me, but not a big deal. What's the standard for numbering? I see in the "1960s and 1970s" section there is one sentence that says
five-performanceand another that says
176-performance. Is it all supposed to be all Arabic numerals (so 5-performance instead of five-performance)? Or am I missing something.
difficult-to-understand terminology and symbols.in the lede and that
Where uncommon terms are essential, they should be placed in context, linked and briefly defined. Again, maybe its different for theatre articles, so please let me know if that is the case. Regarding the layout, it looks good to me. I will say, that to me, the title
Broadway revivalis a bit unintuitive. I "get" what you are trying to do with it, but I feel like it could use a better name. Correct me if I am wrong however. There are also red links, is that intended?
Other design featureslooks like it was cut off from another part of the article (
Next to the boxes is a three-centered proscenium arch.). I would say that
There is a three-centered prosenium arch next to the boxes.. In general, there are many other sentences that seem "chopped". Not saying its a bad thing, or that it should be changed, just something to note.
The theater's interior was refurbished in 2000.belongs there, given that there is only 3 sentences about it in the actual article. Could be wrong, let me know if I am.
Stage house sectionthere is only one citation. I am assuming that one citation has the info to back up everything in that paragraph, right?
Overall, good job.
Rlink2 (
talk) 18:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
What's the standard for numbering?- per MOS:NUMERAL "Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words." So that is what I have done.
MOS:INTRO states that we should avoid "difficult-to-understand terminology and symbols." in the lede and that "Where uncommon terms are essential, they should be placed in context, linked and briefly defined"- Sometimes I have difficulty determining when a term is difficult to understand for others, especially in architecture but also in other subjects. Are there specific terms you are confused about? I can add a brief explanation to these.
I will say, that to me, the title "Broadway revival" is a bit unintuitive.- This is another thing I've found to be pretty common. Until you brought it up, it hadn't occurred to me that "Broadway revival" could be confusing, so I've added a link.
I do have some questions: for the content below the header Stage house section there is only one citation. I am assuming that one citation has the info to back up everything in that paragraph, right?- Correct.
My only quibble is the short paragraph below "history" - not immedaitely obvious what the general situation in Times Square and productions has to do with this particular theatre.- Yes, I will do that soon. Generally, this is meant to show that Times Square's theater district was well-established by the time the Chanins came around.
but you did go into alot of detail, even into the type of brick used for the building and almost every play performed there.- Heh, yeah, I did go into quite a bit of detail about the plays, but this is typical of GAs on Broadway theaters (about half of them are now good articles). I tended to mention only the notable productions described in at least one of the bibliographical sources. As for the brick, that's typical of my architectural articles as well.
See if you can find any free images of inside the building, it would be nice but certainly not required.- I am actually in the process of looking for these images right now. This theater was completed in 1926, so any images of the theater published that year have just recently fallen out of copyright. Epicgenius ( talk) 00:26, 1 February 2022 (UTC)