This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
St. Anthony Hall article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
St. Anthony Hall has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society 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: August 5, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
A fact from St. Anthony Hall appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 25 August 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone know of an image good enough to get the Hebrew Letters off of? I'm fairly familiar with Hebrew Letters, I just need a good image. Naraht ( talk) 14:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Argenti Aertheri ( talk · contribs) 00:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
I’ll update this as I work on the review ~ Argenti Aertheri (Chat?)
Last edited: 04:06, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. 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). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Bot says it’s fine, will do a more thorough check in a bit. Looks good! | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | There's an awful lot about architecture, but maybe that's the actual main topic? I need to think about it. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Yes, but maybe cut a few? They end up out of sync with the text. Response: I cut some. Line up is better but still not perfect.
| |
7. Overall assessment. |
Unclear text
Other (none are required, feel free to ignore)
Fix the handful of issues regarding clarity and I'll be thrilled to pass it. I'm like a mile from the Yale Becton Center and had no idea why it looked like that, always figured it was just another bit of brutalism like the Armstrong building. Learn something new every day I guess!
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
St. Anthony Hall article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
St. Anthony Hall has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society 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: August 5, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
A fact from St. Anthony Hall appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 25 August 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Does anyone know of an image good enough to get the Hebrew Letters off of? I'm fairly familiar with Hebrew Letters, I just need a good image. Naraht ( talk) 14:17, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Argenti Aertheri ( talk · contribs) 00:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
I’ll update this as I work on the review ~ Argenti Aertheri (Chat?)
Last edited: 04:06, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. 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). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Bot says it’s fine, will do a more thorough check in a bit. Looks good! | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | There's an awful lot about architecture, but maybe that's the actual main topic? I need to think about it. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Yes, but maybe cut a few? They end up out of sync with the text. Response: I cut some. Line up is better but still not perfect.
| |
7. Overall assessment. |
Unclear text
Other (none are required, feel free to ignore)
Fix the handful of issues regarding clarity and I'll be thrilled to pass it. I'm like a mile from the Yale Becton Center and had no idea why it looked like that, always figured it was just another bit of brutalism like the Armstrong building. Learn something new every day I guess!