Talk:Portland Center Stage/Archive 1

Abbreviation?
The lead says the abbreviation is PSC (Portland Stage Center?) which is also what the rest of the article seems to use (judging by a very quick scan, that is). The infobox, however, states that the abbreviation is PCS, which only seems logical per Portland Center Stage ... ? — 97198 (talk) 10:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed, thanks. Cirt (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Assessment
I'm bumping this up to C class. I think B class is in pretty easy reach. In general, I think there is a need for some polishing of the wording; as is typical, I think, for fact-loaded articles like this one, it takes a little time to find the smoothest wording to tie all the facts together.

Also (somewhat related), I'd like to see a little additional structure. There is a lot of detail about finances, about personnel changes, and about the productions. Perhaps each could use its own section. It gets rather confusing with them all mixed in together, and difficult to follow the thread of each of the topics.

Great foundation for a good article. I'll try to help out as it progresses. -Pete (talk) 23:06, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the bump up to C-class. I agree that the wording needs some polishing, but as I wrote it it'd probably be best if someone else gives it a read-through and does some copyediting. I feel that all the material that's there is pertinent (of course would love to hear other thoughts on that) but I am most certainly up for any sort of reorganization/restructuring. Cirt (talk) 01:05, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's looking pretty good -- trying to give it the once-over. As for restructuring, it doesn't necessarily need to be retitling of sections, but it was unclear what the focus of some of the paragraphs was. I think as long as each paragraph focuses mostly on either the business/personnel/political end of things or the artistic aspect, it will be fine; working on that now. I think I'd prefer to help you work it up to GA review, and help out with any other suggestions, than review it myself; that way we'll get a good third set of eyes on it anyway. Again, good work! -Pete (talk) 22:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course, we could just put it through the normal WP:GAN process when you think it's ready. Thanks for all the copyediting help, much appreciated. Cirt (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem. I've gone through the whole thing, I'd say it's ready for nomination. You want to do the honors, or should I? Also let's be sure to list it at WikiProject Oregon/to do. -Pete (talk)
 * I nominated it at WP:GAN, so fingers crossed. Feel free to add it to WikiProject Oregon/to do. Cirt (talk) 00:18, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

A few additional sources recommended from GA review
Marked off one incorporated into the article. Cirt (talk) 09:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Image change
The image was changed from 1 to 2. I object to this change. The 2nd image is distorted and bent out of shape. It is of a lesser quality than the previous image. Please do not change it again without talk page discussion. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 15:42, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Portland-Armory Portland-Oregon 2008-May.jpg
 * File:Portland-Center-Stage-at-dusk.jpeg


 * Cirt, the image was changed because of a help-desk request, specifically because of a good faith request regarding the personality rights of the man in the picture. In general, I don't think its wise to force people, who didn't know their picture was being taken, to maintain that picture of them when we have an equivalent picture provided which serves the same purpose.  See HD.   -- Jayron  32  03:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I was already aware of your first sentence. I do not quite understand your logic in your 2nd sentence. The picture is take of a building on a public street. However, I will crop out the person. -- Cirt (talk) 18:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. -- Cirt (talk) 18:12, 21 November 2010 (UTC)