Talk:Philip A. Hart Plaza/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, should have this one to you within a couple of days. Will mainly focus on copyediting issues. Thanks ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 22:18, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

 * The opening sentence "Philip A. Hart Plaza in downtown Detroit, is a city plaza along the Detroit River" could be better reworded. How about something like Philip A. Hart Plaza is a city plaza situated in downtown Detroit, along the Detroit River or something similar?
 * "It is located more or less on the site" - encyclopaedic, I would either reword this or get rid of it?
 * I'm afraid that the history section is suffering from severe de-organisation issues. It needs a real copyedit if it were to meet the GA criteria, I would strongly recommend merging all of those sentences in order to create three main paragraphs instead of one sentence for every paragraph, like it is now
 * Surroundings section unreferenced
 * I would try either cutting down on the list in the Events or converting it into a larger prose
 * Too many images in the Events section disrupts the format of the article, try deleting one image?
 * The Pylon section could be merged into two large paragraphs in order to improve flow
 * "prohibition of child labor, free public school education and employer paid pensions and health care" - employer paid pensions?
 * The latter half of the Transcending section is unreferenced

On hold
In its current standing this article does not meet the GA criteria and I fear that a lot of work would have to be put into this in order for it to reach that goal. The major concerns here the prose issues and encyclopaedic phrases such as "The gentleman pointing from Detroit to Windsor is George DeBaptis". It's going to need a thorough copyedit in order for it to reach the criteria, so I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days and will see if anything has improved until then. I could put it on hold for longer if need be. Thanks, ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 20:32, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Close - not listed
I am sorry to say that the article does not meet the GA criteria at this time, as well as having expired with no activity. The are too many prose/layout issues that currently stand in the way and without a general copyedit it won't meet the GA criteria. Sorry to do this, feel free to renominate once they're all done. ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 20:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)