Talk:Al Hirschfeld Theatre/GA1

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 10:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

This looks like another well written article nominated by Epicgenius. If my experience is anything to go by, it is likely to be close to being a Good Article. I will start my review soon. simongraham (talk) 10:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments
This is a stable and well-written article. 96.7% of authorship is by Epicgenius. It is currently ranked Start class and a DYK nominee.


 * The article is of substantial length, 5,108 words of readable prose, plus a referenced list of notable productions and an infobox.
 * It is written in a summary style, consistent with relevant Manuals of Style.
 * Citations seem to be thorough.
 * References appear to be from reputable sources.
 * Images have appropriate licensing and public domain or CC tags.
 * Earwig's Copyvio Detector identifies a 36.3% chance of copyright violation with the Landmarks Preservation Commission, 27.0% with an article on the theatre in Playbill and 23.7% with the item on the theatre in IMDB. It seems that the overlap with the latter two are mainly the list of productions so this does not constitute a violation.
 * My grammar checker highlights that there is a high usage of the passive voice in the article. I suggest reducing these to make it more approachable.
 * I have fixed some instances. However, there are many places in the text where it is difficult to use active voice, such as part of the design section. In other cases, active and passive voice are used together so the sentences don't all have the same grammatical pattern; that can lead to a similar situation as described in the essay Proseline. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That is fair. It is a fine balancing act sometimes. simongraham (talk) 08:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Should "the center section includes a stair" read "a flight of stairs" or is it a single stair.
 * It is a single staircase (technically, the staircase has a landing in the middle). Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The southern end of the lounge contains a seating area, with a niche enclosing a marble water fountain. The northern end contains a staircase descending directly into the orchestra seating, with a wrought-iron railing and ceiling lantern." Recommend replacing one instance of the word "contains". There are also other instances (for example, "The second-westernmost arch contains a double metal door at the ground story, while the westernmost (right) arch contains a window at the ground story."
 * I have rephrased these. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "In addition, the seats were upholstered". I suggest that "in addition" is superfluous.
 * Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "The balcony level (also known as the mezzanine)" The term messanine was used previously. Does this describe the same feature? If so, I suggest explaining this at the first mention.
 * Yes, I have clarified this. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "the latter of which ran at the Beck for six months." Is it necessary to repeat "at the Beck"? Also please take a look at the previous paragraph where "the Beck" features frequently.
 * I have removed the repetitions. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * "epicenter" is an interesting word choice. Is this a contemporary quote?
 * This isn't quoted from the reference. However, I'm not sure what to replace this with. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I am not sure it is strictly encyclopaedic but I think that is OK. simongraham (talk) 08:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

I concur with the statement made by No Swan So Fine that this is a "wonderful article" with "phenomenal research". Please ping me when you would like me to take another look. simongraham (talk) 19:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review. I have addressed the comments you mentioned above. Epicgenius (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Excellent work. I will start my review now. simongraham (talk) 08:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Assessment
The six good article criteria:
 * 1) It is reasonable well written.
 * the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct;
 * it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
 * all inline citations are from reliable sources;
 * it contains no original research;
 * it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism;
 * it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage
 * it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
 * it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
 * 1) It has a neutral point of view.
 * it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
 * images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Congratulations, Epicgenius. This article meets the criteria to be a Good Article.

Pass simongraham (talk) 08:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)