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.
I will be reviewing this article, comments will probably be finished in the next 72 hours!
Arconning (
talk·contribs)
Prose and MoS
Is the The in mentions of the name of the building part of the official name? Tried comparing with
The New York Times and it always capitalized the "the" but in this article it doesn't. Would like a reason! :)
The most common name is "the Wilbraham", usually with the definite article before "Wilbraham". I don't know if "the" is capitalized as part of the official name, but
MOS:THECAPS recommends lowercasing "the" in the middle of a sentence (except for titles and edge cases like The Hague), so that's what I did.
Epicgenius (
talk)
17:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lead
New York City designated landmark, add hyphen between City and designated.
I've reworded the sentence to avoid this issue. (Personally, I think the hyphen might not be needed here. Technically it's the government, not the city, that designated the building as a landmark, and so "New York City" isn't being used as an adjective phrase; in other words, it's a designated landmark in NYC.)
Epicgenius (
talk)
17:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The china and glass purveyors Davis Collamore & Co. leased the basement, ground-floor storefront, and second story when the Wilbraham opened., add commas after purveyors and Co..
Images are appropriate and have the proper licenses.
Refs
References all seem reliable and are properly formatted.
Spotchecks
Earwig detector has no issues, just picked up some quotes. Pass.
Manual check done, no issues.
Misc.
Article has no ongoing edit war, broad coverage and information about the subject of the article, focused, and neutral about the topic (not really sure how would you be biased to a building, but the article shows no sign of that).
Thanks for the review
Arconning, I appreciate it. I've addressed all the issues you raised above. (Funnily, it is sometimes possible for architectural fans to be biased in favor or against a building, but I digress.)
Epicgenius (
talk)
17:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The discussion above 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.
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.
I will be reviewing this article, comments will probably be finished in the next 72 hours!
Arconning (
talk·contribs)
Prose and MoS
Is the The in mentions of the name of the building part of the official name? Tried comparing with
The New York Times and it always capitalized the "the" but in this article it doesn't. Would like a reason! :)
The most common name is "the Wilbraham", usually with the definite article before "Wilbraham". I don't know if "the" is capitalized as part of the official name, but
MOS:THECAPS recommends lowercasing "the" in the middle of a sentence (except for titles and edge cases like The Hague), so that's what I did.
Epicgenius (
talk)
17:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Lead
New York City designated landmark, add hyphen between City and designated.
I've reworded the sentence to avoid this issue. (Personally, I think the hyphen might not be needed here. Technically it's the government, not the city, that designated the building as a landmark, and so "New York City" isn't being used as an adjective phrase; in other words, it's a designated landmark in NYC.)
Epicgenius (
talk)
17:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
The china and glass purveyors Davis Collamore & Co. leased the basement, ground-floor storefront, and second story when the Wilbraham opened., add commas after purveyors and Co..
Images are appropriate and have the proper licenses.
Refs
References all seem reliable and are properly formatted.
Spotchecks
Earwig detector has no issues, just picked up some quotes. Pass.
Manual check done, no issues.
Misc.
Article has no ongoing edit war, broad coverage and information about the subject of the article, focused, and neutral about the topic (not really sure how would you be biased to a building, but the article shows no sign of that).
Thanks for the review
Arconning, I appreciate it. I've addressed all the issues you raised above. (Funnily, it is sometimes possible for architectural fans to be biased in favor or against a building, but I digress.)
Epicgenius (
talk)
17:00, 2 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The discussion above 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.