Talk:Exelon Pavilions/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Exelon Pavilions/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * "Beeby is also the designer of the Joan W. and Irving B. Harris Theater for Music and Dance." - parenthetical... remove as it doesn't have anything to do with the Exelon Pavilions.
 * I revised the text to clarify the significance of the link.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * "The North Pavilions are the first Chicago buildings to use building integrated photovoltaic cells, i.e., a solar energy system incorporated into the building's construction materials." - why the i.e.? That clause seems to be a definition of the term.
 * I reworded this.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:34, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * " the future expansion of the Art Institute of Chicago." - calling it the Modern Wing is probably OK; linking to it would be better. Spellcheck on "pavlions".
 * There is no link for the Modern Wing that I know of.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * "The pavilions provide sufficient energy to power the equivalent of 14 star-rated energy-efficient houses in Chicago." - checked the source, and sure enough, that's what it says. star-rated should be linked... somewhere. Energy Star?
 * Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:54, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Need more details as to what that actually meant.
 * At some point it should be noted that Exelon and ComEd are energy utilites/distributors (whichever is technically correct).
 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I tried to think of other major aspects of the pavilions, but couldn't really think of any. So it looks pretty good; just some minor issues. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 22:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I tried to think of other major aspects of the pavilions, but couldn't really think of any. So it looks pretty good; just some minor issues. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 22:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I tried to think of other major aspects of the pavilions, but couldn't really think of any. So it looks pretty good; just some minor issues. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 22:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I addressed a couple of points, and now I think it meets the criteria. &mdash; Rob (  talk  ) 13:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)