Talk:Central Park (skyscraper)/GA1

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


 * I'm starting a review of the article. At first glance I didn't see any reasons for an immediate fail. I'll be checking the grammar, compliance with MOS, sources and other elements of the GA criteria.    Will Beback    talk    23:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Good article criteria
 * 1. Well-written:
 * The article appears to be well-written. I see no spelling or grammatical errors. The layout largely follows the guideline at WikiProject Skyscrapers/Articles. It also follows all of the MOS rules that I am aware of.


 * 2. Factually accurate and verifiable:
 * Every assertion is cited. I don't have access to all of the sources, but they appear to be meet WP:RS. I don't detect any original research.


 * 3. Broad in its coverage:
 * The article seems to be comprehensive. It is very detailed, but all of the details related directly to the subject matter and I don't see anything extraenous or off-topic.


 * 4. Neutral:
 * The article has a properly matter-of-fact tone. Claims, where made, are attributed. Both sides of a dispute about the building's design are presented.


 * 5. Stable:
 * There are no edit wars or major changes in the recent past.


 * 6. Illustrated:
 * The article is nicely illustrated. While it's not a requirement for GA, it'd be nice to have a picture or two of the ground level, perhaps of the eponymous park or the main entrance.

In conclusion, this article meets all of the good article criteria. I don't see any issues that need to be fixed. Good work.  Will Beback   talk    06:06, 21 February 2009 (UTC)