Talk:Stanley Industrial Alliance Stage/GA1

GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
WP:LEAD needs one more paragraph to describe Live Stage section and its subsection. All citations should follow punctuation marks. All citations should have publishers' info.

I will add another paragraph to the lead and see if I can add more publishers' info to the citations. About your concern that all citations should follow punctuation, do you mean you don't want to see a footnote in the middle of a sentence without a comma before it? If that's the case I can add a few commas where necessary and rearrange some other sentences where a comma wouldn't be appropriate. Just let me know if that is what you mean. Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 00:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what I meant.--Crzy cheetah 00:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. All footnotes now follow punctuation. Moisejp (talk) 02:59, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And a second lead paragraph has been added. I am still working my way through all the references to add any necessary information. Moisejp (talk) 03:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
I have doubts that Findfamilyfun and an aol member are reliable.

OK, I have replaced/removed the Findfamilyfun references (one was just a back-up for a statement that already had other sources backing it up, so that one I removed, and the other one I replaced). But I think you'll find the aol member source The Review is a serious-minded website dedicated to theatre reviews. Could you have another look at that one? It is also the only site I have been able to find on the web that lists dates for these productions in 1998-1999. Moisejp (talk) 23:42, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a personal website run by one person. I am still not comfortable with that website, but I'll ask around about that site and get back to you.--Crzy cheetah 00:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
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):
Most of the images are here with permissions, I'd like to see them confirmed by someone else. Also, too many images in this page and it violates WP:NOTREPOSITORY. The placement of the Image:Stanley Theatre (2).JPG should be changed because it messes up the page right now. Do not force image sizes per Image use policy: Displayed image size

All right, I have reduced the size of all images to the default thumb size. I have moved the Stanley Theatre (2) image (replaced the logo with it).

Now that the pictures are smaller, does it still seem like there are too many to you? If so I could move one of them to the gallery. Compared with other theatre-related GAs such as 5th Avenue Theatre and Chicago Theatre the number of pictures seems to be about the same, though. Or did you mean some of the pictures in the gallery should go? If so, I would be happy to comply with that.

I don't understand your concern about the pictures' permission. All of them have proper permission. Stanleytheatrecirca1991.jpg has been released into the public domain, Stanley Theatre Heritage Plaque.jpg is in the Wikipedia Commons, and all of the other ones have their permission archived in the Wikipedia OTRS system and have permission granted under the GNU Free Documentation License. Moisejp (talk) 00:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the gallery section is unnecessary, since there are no text that describes those pictures. As for the permissions, I see that for some of the images, there are permissions archived in the OTRS system, but they're not confirmed yet by our colleagues with the OTRS account; they're listed here.--Crzy cheetah 00:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All right, so I need to contact one of the permissions-related OTRS people on that list and have the images confirmed? OK, I will do that. Thank you. Moisejp (talk) 01:17, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Good luck improving the article--Crzy cheetah 22:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Here are my comments about prose:

There are many instances of over citing and parentheses in the middle of a sentence, could you go over the whole article and fix them? Some examples,
- ...(due to tobacco regulations) but... - get rid of parentheses and add a comma
- opened in either 1930,[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8] or 1931,[9][10][11][12] - I think 2 footnotes for each year is fine. Avoid over citing.
- ...Henry Holdsby Simmons as the architect,[2][6][7] - Same as above
- ...(the same stone as used for the Canadian Parliament Buildings) - avoid parentheses
- ...starring Lillian Gish.[1][2][5][6] - over citing
Instead of listing 24 blockbusters, why not just list five of them, for example, and write more details about them?
In 1999 the theatre was awarded a City of Vancouver Heritage Award, [11][47][48] as well as an IES International Illumination Design Award.[47] - it's a one-sentence paragraph, either expand or merge
The External links section should be the last section per WP:GTL.

The last suggestion for the future is to create a new page and list all productions there. Now, this list takes a lot of space. I don't mind much, but it may bug some readers. I am going to put this on hold for seven days.--Crzy cheetah 07:06, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]