Talk:Hong Kong Club Building

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article eschews the Wikilinking of dates. "Wikipedia has articles on days of the year, years, decades, centuries and millennia. Link to one of these pages only if it is likely to deepen readers' understanding of a topic." Source: WP:DATE

Hong Kong Club Building was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: January 7, 2008

	Hong Kong Portal This article is part of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project!
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Hong Kong To-do: edit purge Clean up all MTR station pages. They are literally all over the place. Two model pages are Tsing Yi Station and Sheung Shui Station. They each describe a feature special to the station, Station layout, exit, and connections, as well as neighbouring stations and the station "box". We will also need plenty of updated pictures (e.g. removing all KCR-related images except those on the KCR article). Check that all pages have basically the same language structure as Tsing Yi Station and Sheung Shui Station. Links to location maps are good too. (Should also perform these checks on Chinese Wikipedia.) Clean-up pages that link with TVB, especially its series pages.

	Architecture Portal This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

[edit] GA assessment

I’ve placed the article on hold for a second opinion to address the following:

This is a peculiar article in that it is attempting to address three entirely different structures whose only commonality is the (principle) tenant. The page title and infobox, therefore, are somewhat misleading. I’m concerned that the only structure of true notability is the “second generation”. The “third generation,” which is implicitly the focus, doesn’t appear particularly notable (i.e. not tallest in a certain area, not unique architecture/construction, etc.); a notable tenant does not make a notable structure. Frankly, I think the article should be restructured to focus on the “second generation”; the “first generation” information would then be appropriate for background and the “third,” obviously, as the replacement. Thoughts? Ɛƚƈơƅƅơƚɑ _talk 03:33, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm failing the article. There has been no response, and there are major issues as noted above. Also, remember you need punctuation before you place a ref, and you need to wikilink dates. — Dihydrogen Monoxide 22:51, 7 January 2008 (UTC)