Talk:Acrisure Stadium/GA1

(Redirected from Talk:Heinz Field/GA1)
Latest comment: 16 years ago by Peanut4 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
Lead
  • "Heinz Field is a stadium located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania." I think you should say what sort of stadium it is. E.g. "Heinz Field is an American football stadium located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania."
History
  • "After discussions over the Pittsburgh Pirates building a full-time baseball park, a proposal was made to renovate Three Rivers Stadium into a full-time football facility." Wikilink Pittsburgh Pirates. Did they use Three Rivers Stadium? Was this why there were proposals to convert it into a full-time football stadium? When were these discussions?
    • From the sources that I have, I only know that the discussions took place.
  • "Others criticized the $281 million of public money allocated for Plan B." Who does others refer to?
  • What was the difference between the first official and unofficial opening games?
    • A pre-season game is basically practice, though the stadium was used and people attended it wasn't officially a game.
  • Wikilink David Priestley.
  • "The Steelers were scheduled to open Heinz Field on September 16 with a Steelers game against the Cleveland Browns," The Steelers mentioned twice here. I think it needs a slight tweak.
  • "Thus moving the stadium's premiere to October 7, against the Cincinnati Bengals." This sentence lacks a main verb. Either change it to a clause of the previous sentence. Or re-write it.
Features
  • "The surface was re-surfaced multiple times," surface used twice. I would find a new word for one of these. In fact surface or a derivative four times in one par.
MOS
  • Numerals and units, e.g. 1,500 seats should use non-breaking space. I.e. 1,500 seats.

A few things to do, but nothing substantial, so I'll put it on hold. By the way, some really nice images on there. Peanut4 (talk) 18:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Think I got 'em all. Thanks. Blackngold29 00:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)Reply
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:  
  6. 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):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

A really nice job, well written with some good images. I don't know if the article is too short, or it's too early in the stadium's history to go to FAC, but I certainly think it's worth a shot. I would suggest getting a peer review or any suggestions to see if there's anything I've missed, particularly anything American football specific or possible expansion. But otherwise a very good article. Well done. Peanut4 (talk) 01:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)Reply