Talk:Washington Park (Chicago park)/GA1

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

Starting GA reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process.

This article has been reviewed as part of WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * Reasonably well written apart from the penultimate sentence: The plan faced diverse opposition among which are those that note Washington Park's listing on the National Register of Historic Places cannot survive this Olympic plan. This is very poorly written.  Would also suggest that this section be integrated into the section above.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Ref #19 is a dead link
 * Other references check out, assume GF for off-line sources
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 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:
 * On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Major contributors and projects have been notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, all sorted now, I made some more copy-edits. Keep GA listing, thanks for your work and also thanks to SuomiFinland. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Pass/Fail:
 * On hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:46, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Major contributors and projects have been notified. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, all sorted now, I made some more copy-edits. Keep GA listing, thanks for your work and also thanks to SuomiFinland. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I believe I have addressed the concerns above.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The article could benefit from either a map, diagram, or aerial view. This is not always possible.  If only non-free images or maps are available, possible a link could be added at the end of the article under Outside Links.  The one sentence paragraphs in the history section are also not to be encouraged but sometimes unavoidable.  The Olympic bid section has signs of dementia having mentioned Rio twice twice. :p Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Map added and text revised.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:13, 25 January 2010 (UTC)