Talk:Headroom LGBTQ+ Lounge/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Gerald Waldo Luis in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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: Gerald Waldo Luis (talk · contribs) 18:22, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply


Haven't touched the GAN page for so long. Anyway, I'm back. Looks like a great article about a pitiful story. Recently got my first boyfriend, so this could b a pretty weird way of celebrating? GeraldWL 18:22, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hey, nice to see you again! Armadillopteryx 22:43, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Lead and infobox

edit
  • Map caption reads "Location within Hudson County, New Jersey". I think it could benefit from a link to Hudson County. That is, if it could be altered.
    I agree, but unfortunately the text is autogenerated from the pushpin map template. I don't know of a way to alter it.
  • Lead looks good, nothing to complain.

Description

edit
  • "Located at 150 Bay Street in Jersey City, New Jersey, Headroom was co-owned"-- perhaps have it "Headroom LGBTQ+ Lounge" as it is the first mention in the body.
      Done.
  • "called "A Trans-elebration","-- trivial, but maybe it could be great to have a note that reads "An alteration of celebration."?
    I'm not sure that clarification is needed.
  • "parties hosted by Olivia Lux." Mind giving a brief description as to who Lux is?
    Sure!   Done.

History

edit
  • "that address before Headroom LGBTQ+ Lounge"-- since the full name has been stated earlier in the body, the "LGBTQ+ Lounge" bit here is not needed.
    I think it's needed to differentiate it from the previous business at that address, which was called Headroom Bar & Social.
  • In the image caption, after "QR codes", adding "(bottom-left)" would be helpful.
    I don't feel too strongly, but I also don't think it's needed.
    I think it could be helpful: the image is vertical, and the QR is out of the typical focus area of humans when seeing a picture (see photo; center is the focus). I myself didn't spot the image until I zoomed in at the photo. GeraldWL 11:37, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
    Fair enough.   Done. Armadillopteryx 19:33, 4 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • "From June 2018 through the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the establishment was Headroom Bar & Social, a neighborhood bar that featured live jazz performances, comedians and other artists." It's not merely a rename right? If so, suggest changing "establishment was" to "establishment's location once stood".
    The location was no different; it was a rebranding (so different products, shows, etc., but no change in the space itself).
  • "businesses is that ... this is"-- The ... is omission of sentence, right? I'd prefer [...] as it's more common, and ... usually renders as a pause.
    MOS:... does not indicate use of brackets here.
  • "contact tracing, and all of its tables were spaced 6 feet (1.8 m) apart"-- Links to contact tracing and social distancing would be helpful.
      Done.
  • "remain masked"-- link to Face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

GeraldWL 10:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Closure

edit

Reception

edit
  • "In a statement to NJ.com, Nicky Doll"-- Nicky Doll has been mentioned previously, so "Nicky" is not needed here.
    Not sure whether "Doll" should be treated like a surname here; maybe Another Believer could offer input?
  • Overall the section is good. If it were to go to FA I would recommend paraphrasing. GeraldWL 10:28, 3 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Others

edit

Overall

edit

Armadillopteryx, the article seems to meet the criteria already, so congrats! Passing. GeraldWL 10:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed
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.