Talk:Patterson Office Tower/GA2

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

Reviewer: David Eppstein (talk · contribs) 23:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

This article about an office tower at a university (not unlike many other non-notable office towers at other universities) has been puffed up to something resembling notability by a user with the same name as the structure, in violation of WP:PROMONAME, who joined this November, who has only edited this article, and whose user page reads "I'm only here for one thing: get Patterson Office Tower to GA."

Most of the article goes into unnecessary detail about very minor incidents or incidental coverage, such as being the site of a seminar (it would be unusual for a university building not to be the site of a seminar), being mentioned in the university's capital plan (again, it would be unusual for it not), placement and removal of nearby outdoor decorative artworks not actually part of the building, etc. So I believe it is very far from meeting Good Article criterion 3b and I am not at all convinced that it is even notable. The Patterson Statue image likely also violates the sculptor's copyright, failing criterion 6a.

Additionally, some of the sources are primary web sites that appear to be of dubious reliability, and some infobox information (notably the architectural style) does not appear in the main article text.

I believe that removing the picayune detail that causes this to fail 3b would end up cutting this back to a stub, not worthy of GA. So I think it meets criterion 1 of WP:GAFAIL, "It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria", and should be quick-failed.

In addition Sockpuppet investigations/LovelyGirl7 may be relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:57, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In addition, has been rolling back some of my own edits to this very review. Don't do that! —David Eppstein (talk) 17:34, 22 December 2019 (UTC)