Talk:1501 Broadway/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Z1720 (talk · contribs) 16:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article shortly. If you would like me to add additional comments for a possible FAC run, please request it below. These FAC comments, if given, will not influence this article's GAN. Z1720 (talk) 16:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments:


 * "Paramount predecessor Famous Players-Lasky proposed the theater first, in 1922," -> "Paramount predecessor Famous Players-Lasky proposed the theater in 1922," The reader will assume this came first since it is talked about first, so I don't think the word is necessary and ruins the flow.
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "after a previous landowner." -> named after a previous landowner? I think the current wording is a little ambiguous
 * Yes. I have fixed it. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The spandrels are ornamented with motifs depicting classical motifs and theatrical icons," -> "The spandrels are ornamented with classical motifs and theatrical icons," to remove the repetitive "motif"
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The clock faces were mechanically operated from the beginning." -> from their construction?
 * Yes. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "Past that was a grand hall, which was modeled on the Versailles chapel and measured 150 feet (46 m) long by 50 feet (15 m) wide.[24][42] The hall was modeled after the Paris Opera House with white marble columns, balustrades, and a grand staircase flanking the hallway." The first sentence says it was modeled after the Versaille chapel, but the second says the Paris Opera House. Can this be clarified?
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The former auditorium is spanned by eight trusses," I suggest wikilinking trusses
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The restaurant can fit 600 diners but can accommodate up to 1,000 people for concerts." -> "The restaurant can fit 600 diners and accommodate 1,000 people for concerts."
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm at History. More comments later. Z1720 (talk) 17:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Continuing:


 * "would construct not only the theater but also an office tower." -> "would construct the theatre and an office tower." to reduce the number of words.
 * "Some $17 million had been spent to date on the entire project," Delete some as unnecessary
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The building was designated not only for its historical importance to the motion-picture industry but also for its architectural importance as an Art Deco skyscraper." -> "The building was designated for its historical importance to the motion-picture industry and its architectural importance as an Art Deco skyscraper." Reducing words
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The World had opened by 2000." -> "The World had opened in 2000."
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "the early 2010s, including Ben & Jerry's" I don't think a comma is supposed to be after 2010s
 * Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "renovating the building, and it considered adding an entrance on 43rd Street." Suggest deleting the comma and "it". Typically, I don't think a comma is necessary before an "and" if only two things are listed and I think it interrupts the flow of a sentence. Other editors disagree, so it's a judgment call. MOS:SERIAL might give guidance on this. Whichever route you take will not affect passing this GAN.
 * This was not intended to be a serial list. You are right that the comma may not be necessary before an "and" if only two things are listed, but this applies largely if the second clause isn't a standalone clause. For example, "The owners renovated the building, and moved the entrance" is wrong, but "The owners renovated the building, and they moved the entrance" can be correct (albeit wordy). Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * ""conscientiously give the building anything except size"; however, in Chappell's view, this fit with the "concentrated tawdriness" of Times Square." Since there is a semi-colon, these can be considered separate thoughts and "however" isn't necessary.
 * Done. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

References will be below. Z1720 (talk) 20:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Reference check:

Version reviewed


 * Earwig doesn't bring any concerns.
 * Citations checked: Ref 3, 25, 37, 217, 219, 220 - no concerns.
 * References are formatted.

Images:
 * No image concerns

Just some prose/mos issues to resolve. Z1720 (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. I have addressed all the issues you brought up now. Epicgenius (talk) 17:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Concerns are addressed, so I'm promoting it to GA status. Great work as always. Z1720 (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)