Wikipedia:Peer review/Voxman Music Building/archive1

Voxman Music Building
I've listed this article for peer review because.

Thanks, TheWarOfArt (talk) 05:14, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
 * @ you haven't provided a reason. The article does however seem well written and well sourced, so I'm not sure what I can add. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:54, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

General

 * I think buildings/structures articles are much improved by a photograph.
 * In the absence of a photograph, or indeed with one, a building article really needs a description of the building itself. This article doesn't have one.  Looking at images of the building online, it is certainly striking, and a description should be relatively easy to craft.  This should include reference to architectural style, etc.
 * Something on the building's reception would be useful. Do architectural critics / its users (teachers/students/performers) like it or loathe it?

Lede

 * The lede is very short and will need expansion if your intention is GA.
 * Is an "academic building" a specific type? I know what you mean, but I'm not sure the "academic" isn't academic.

History

 * "located on the bank of the Iowa River" - does the Iowa River only have one bank? The left or the right?
 * "a new location for the new music building" - two "new"s in one sentence. An "alternative location"...?
 * "formally announced" - had it previously been announced "informally"? Suggest "announced" is sufficient.
 * "officially opened" - did it have a soft opening first? Suggest "opened" is sufficient.

Performing spaces

 * "700-seat concert Hall, a 200-seat recital Hall and a 75-seat organ Hall" - in each case, I don't think the capitalisation of "Hall" is necessary.