Talk:Huntington Bank Stadium/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

GA Sweeps: On hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing Sweeps to determine if the article should remain a Good article. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. However, in reviewing the article, I have found there are several issues that needs to be addressed.

"Sketches for the regents were available in December 2006 and, pending approval by the Minnesota Legislature, as of June 2007, biosciences was scheduled for completion in 2015." The "as of June 2007" needs to be updated.

Done. Source for April 2009. -SusanLesch (talk) 03:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

The alcohol controversy section doesn't seem to mention any controversy. Was there some backlash against the law from students, the university, or the city? What caused the state to pass the law in the first place?

I don't know. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The regents vote this coming Wednesday on a proposal to ban alcohol altogether. I hope that addition will take care of the subject, -SusanLesch (talk) 22:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

There are several dead links that need to be fixed. The Internet Archive can help. If they can't be fixed, try and find a new source.

Done. Checklink finds some redirects and a format note but the original links still connect. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

This article covers the topic well and has an excellent source of free images (the non-free images all have correct FURs). I will leave the article on hold for seven days, but if progress is being made and an extension is needed, one may be given. If no progress is made, the article may be delisted, which can then later be renominated at WP:GAN. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps: Kept

Good work addressing the issues. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good Article. Altogether the article is well-written and has a great source of free images. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would be beneficial to update the access dates for all of the online sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:57, 22 June 2009 (UTC)