Talk:Forest Building/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Dclemens1971 (talk · contribs) 07:34, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: IntentionallyDense (talk · contribs) 21:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this soon. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:03, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Review

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	This isn't what I expect from a GA lead. A well written lead shouldn't need citations and should be at least one good sized paragraph {preferably at least 2). See Wikipedia:How to create and manage a good lead section for more guidance. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	2b. 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).	Some issues found. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	7. Overall assessment.

• Why is "West End Presbyterian Church" bolded in the lead? IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  As an alternative name for the building, it's bolded per WP:BOLDSYN. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  From my understanding the church is now who owns the building not really a different name for it. IntentionallyDense (talk) 23:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• The Forest Building was designed around preexisting trees on the site in suburban Henrico County in 1978 and completed in 1980. Source doesn't support the dates or location given. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Source added to be specific. Most sources say 1980 as the general date for the project, but some say 1978. The source I added confirms the two-year period of work on the project. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you. IntentionallyDense (talk) 23:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• following interior renovations that preserved Wines' forest exterior concept. Not supported by source. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:30, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  I moved forward a footnote to support this statement. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you. IntentionallyDense (talk) 23:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. I expanded the lede per your suggestion. I had originally included citations to the specific statement of what this building is uniquely known for per WP:LEADCITE but have taken them out. Thanks for the feedback thus far. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks! The lead is looking much better now! IntentionallyDense (talk) 23:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• At the Forest Building, SITE proposed building the entrance of the warehouse around existing trees on the site Not in the source. IntentionallyDense (talk) 23:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• I don't want this to discourage you from continuing to work on this article. I think you have a great start here, I just don't feel that this article is up to GA standards. I'm going to place this article on hold for now as I want to give you a chance to improve things but to be upfront I'm considering failing this article for two reasons.
  1. The use of quotes. Quotes should only really be used if there is no other way to convey the message the source is trying to get across. About 30% of your article is in quotes. This is too much in my opinion. Additionally, I would consider using the blockquote template for longer quotes.
  2. Sourcing issues. 3 out of the 7 sources I checked had issues. I don't feel that it's productive for me to check all of your sources when I keep finding issues. I encourage you to go back and double-check that you have the right references for all of your information. IntentionallyDense (talk) 23:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)