Talk:Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago/GA2

GA Reassessment

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

   Doesn't comply with WP:Lead and W:Layout

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Not enough information for "broad coverage" (This aspect has been mentioned by several readers on the talkpage)

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Needs more content

Will notify significant contributor(s) of this Reassessment. Will check back in seven days. SilkTork *^YES! 23:29, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

This has very recently undergone a GA Sweeps review during which I scoured the internet to broaden the article to the best of my ability. At this point I would request that this discussion be taken to a community WP:GAR if there are still concerns. I.E., close this as keep or delist. If kept you open a GAR for reconsideration of the rating. If delisted, I open a GAR for reconsideration of the delisting.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

OK. I will delist as failing 1 (b) and 3 (a), and you can open a GAR. I note this article relies heavily on the primary source, so it may fail 2 (a) as well (which considering the topic, it shouldn't!). The article fails Wikipedia:Layout#Images - there are too many images for such a short article, and bunching has occurred - and Wikipedia:Layout#Paragraphs for the use of a bulleted list in the Collection section. The article as it stands is somewhere between start and C class, and has a number of issues. It looks untidy and the information provided is inadequate. The information on the architecture of the building consists of a sentence tucked away at the end of the History section. I find it interesting that information cannot be found on the very first American commission for one of the world's top architects. The Museum of Contemporary Art is one of his most notable works. There's an entire book (Josef Paul Kleihues: The Museum of Contemporary Art Chicago) just on the architecture, and plenty of internet links, as well as book sources. SilkTork *^YES! 21:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)