![]() | Liberty Tower (Manhattan) 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. Review: September 8, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Liberty Tower (Manhattan) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 8 September 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Liberty Tower (Manhattan). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Vincent60030 (
talk)
18:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
5x expanded by Epicgenius ( talk). Self-nominated at 02:33, 8 August 2020 (UTC).
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ovinus Real ( talk · contribs) 09:15, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Shall move onto the full review! Cheers, Ovinus ( talk) 09:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
1a. Needs some minor work
1b. Needs some minor work
Here are some things I noted. Feel free to just mark the things you've done with or, if you disagree, leave a comment as to why you didn't want to make the change so we can discuss. I don't feel strongly about all these changes, of course.
Overall, the prose is in really great shape! It was quite enjoyable and interesting to read, actually. Cheers, Ovinus ( talk) 10:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
The article is very well sourced, and the citations are all of high quality (with specified page numbers, too). All of the statements in the lead have corresponding cited information in the body. Really great work! Ovinus ( talk) 10:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
The article is quite broad, and while the information in Design is quite detailed, I also think it is quite interesting, because it explains the construction of a building with an extra narrow floor-to-area ratio, which involved some unusual features.
I might add some information about modern usage of the building. I know it's now just a residential building, but maybe some information on its average occupancy and carrying capacity would be pertinent. As I mentioned earlier in the review, I would also clarify the status of the building's five elevators. Are they still there? Are there more or less?
Nothing that controversial about a building. The Teapot Dome scandal is neutrally mentioned in passing.
The article is stable. Most of its content was added recently by the nominator.
The article is well-illustrated, and the images are properly attributed as I noted earlier. A google search didn't reveal any images of the building during construction.
Really well done Epicgenius! I'm no expert on featured articles but I think with a bit of trimming in the Design section and more info about modern usage, this could be an FA. I'll take another look at it after you've responded to my comments above. Cheers, Ovinus ( talk) 10:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() | Liberty Tower (Manhattan) 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. Review: September 8, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Liberty Tower (Manhattan) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 8 September 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Liberty Tower (Manhattan). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
The result was: promoted by
Vincent60030 (
talk)
18:39, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
5x expanded by Epicgenius ( talk). Self-nominated at 02:33, 8 August 2020 (UTC).
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ovinus Real ( talk · contribs) 09:15, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Shall move onto the full review! Cheers, Ovinus ( talk) 09:19, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
1a. Needs some minor work
1b. Needs some minor work
Here are some things I noted. Feel free to just mark the things you've done with or, if you disagree, leave a comment as to why you didn't want to make the change so we can discuss. I don't feel strongly about all these changes, of course.
Overall, the prose is in really great shape! It was quite enjoyable and interesting to read, actually. Cheers, Ovinus ( talk) 10:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
The article is very well sourced, and the citations are all of high quality (with specified page numbers, too). All of the statements in the lead have corresponding cited information in the body. Really great work! Ovinus ( talk) 10:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
The article is quite broad, and while the information in Design is quite detailed, I also think it is quite interesting, because it explains the construction of a building with an extra narrow floor-to-area ratio, which involved some unusual features.
I might add some information about modern usage of the building. I know it's now just a residential building, but maybe some information on its average occupancy and carrying capacity would be pertinent. As I mentioned earlier in the review, I would also clarify the status of the building's five elevators. Are they still there? Are there more or less?
Nothing that controversial about a building. The Teapot Dome scandal is neutrally mentioned in passing.
The article is stable. Most of its content was added recently by the nominator.
The article is well-illustrated, and the images are properly attributed as I noted earlier. A google search didn't reveal any images of the building during construction.
Really well done Epicgenius! I'm no expert on featured articles but I think with a bit of trimming in the Design section and more info about modern usage, this could be an FA. I'll take another look at it after you've responded to my comments above. Cheers, Ovinus ( talk) 10:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)