Talk:Metropolitan Tower (Manhattan)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 04:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

This looks like another excellent article on the architecture of New York by Epicgenius and is therefore likely to be close to Good Article status already. I will start a review shortly. simongraham (talk) 04:41, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments
This is a stable and well-written article. 74.7% of authorship is by Epicgenius and 22.6% by Abductive. It is currently ranked C class.


 * The article is of appropriate length, with 3,290 words of readable prose.
 * There are no obvious spelling or grammar errors.
 * It is written in a summary style, consistent with relevant Manuals of Style.
 * Earwig's Copyvio Detector identifies a 19.4% chance of copyright violation with a 1990 article by Goldberger cited in the article. The item is directly quoted and appropriately referenced.
 * All images have appropriate licensing and either CC or public domain tags.
 * References appear to be from reputable sources.

I will now complete the review. simongraham (talk) 05:05, 5 September 2021 (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) 05:08, 5 September 2021 (UTC)