Talk:Hotel McAlpin/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Argenti Aertheri (talk · contribs) 08:34, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Review status

Review last updated at 22:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

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.	See below
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	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).
	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.
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.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	See below
	7. Overall assessment.

Issues

Lead image needs an actual caption.

The last three images convey the same general information, and aren't particularly high quality. Either replace them with better images (perhaps of the interior) or just ditch them. The seemingly random snapshots are distracting in an otherwise good article.

"When the hotel opened, it had 1,500 guest rooms and 1,100 bathrooms... At its peak, the McAlpin contained 1,700 rooms." What? Is that 1,500 guest rooms? The source technically says 1,700 moms, so something definitely went awry somewhere.

Everything else looks good!

@Argenti Aertheri: Thanks for the review. I've modified the lead image's caption and removed two of the last three images. The hotel had 1,700 guestrooms later in its existence, since some of the smaller rooms were split up, but these guestrooms have since been combined into apartments. Sadly, I could not find any good images of the interior. Epicgenius (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Images and their captions look good! And my mistake on the number of rooms Facepalm ~ Argenti Aertheri^(Chat?) 02:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.