Talk:Todd Haimes Theatre/GA2

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 14:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately tagged. Sources are reliable.

"The rigging system includes 35 line sets": what is a line set?
- I have added a link. Epicgenius (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest linking grindhouse.
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"The City at 42nd Street was announced in December 1979 as part of a proposal to restore West 42nd Street around Times Square": what is "the City at 42nd Street"? The next sentence starts "Under the plan", so is it a plan? If so I think the reader should know that without having to read the next sentence.
- Clarified - the City at 42nd Street was a plan for redeveloping that city block. Epicgenius (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Meanwhile, from 1987 to 1989": why "meanwhile"? The events in the previous paragraph only go up to 1986.
- Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"was charged with restoring six of the theaters": I was going to ask who gave them this charge, but apparently they're a non-profit, so I think the wording isn't quite right. Perhaps "A non-profit, the New 42nd Street organization, was formed in September 1990 with the goal of restoring six of the theaters and finding uses for them", though the page for the organization says seven theatres so perhaps that's not quite right?
- I have reworded the sentence in question. Epicgenius (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You might consider using the picture from the 12/31/97 NYT under fair use to show the collapse. The reproduction's not very good in the NYT, though. I just had a look on newspapers.com and the Courier-News has an excellent quality picture you could use. Not necessary for GA of course.
- I will see what I can do about that. WP:NFCCP is pretty strict but, if we agree that Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding, then I can upload that image. (I can theoretically take pictures of the site, but we have no images of the collapse itself, so it may meet the NFCC criteria.) Epicgenius (talk) 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

-- That's everything; the article is in excellent shape. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Thanks for the review. I really appreciate it. I have now addressed all of these issues, except for the image of the collapse, which I have not clipped yet. 12:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Passing; the fixes look good and the picture isn't necessary for GA. I would support fair use for the picture -- I certainly had a much clearer picture of the collapse once I saw it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:07, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]