Talk:Virgin Hotels Chicago/GA1
Latest comment: 9 years ago by The Herald in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: The Herald (talk · contribs) 17:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
You will get the review shortly as time permits. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 17:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Criteria
editGood Article Status – Review Criteria
A good article is—
- Well-written:
- (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
- (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
- Verifiable with no original research:
- (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
- (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2] and
- (c) it contains no original research.
- Broad in its coverage:
- (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
- (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. [4]
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: [5]
- (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
- (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]
Review
edit- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Comments and discussion
editThe article is in a good state and MoS and all looks good. But some points of concerns are:
- There is no indication what for this hotel is famous -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- The WP:LEAD currently includes the following content "the first of the Virgin Hotels brand boutique hotels".--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- A good deal of cuisine and/or some celebrities dining there will do better, though not as advertising. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- I do not see this in the first several sources that I have looked at so I don't think it belongs in a summary.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Bar and lobby images should be stacked upon, not side by side, for aesthetic value. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- Not sure why, but done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- Some criticism of it will do good to keep neutrality, if there is any.. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- Added.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
That's all what I could deduce from the article and all other, cites and layout looks good. Thanks. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:15, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Result
edit
..Holding it till the reply..-The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 09:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
- The Herald please review.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
The article have passed the GA review. All looks good and the issues raised by me have been solved out. MoS and style, cites and layout, add other aspects looks at finest and fits good for a GA. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 08:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Additional notes
edit- ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
- ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
- ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
- ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
- ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
- ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.