Talk:Milwaukee Cold Storage Co. Building/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: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 22:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

• Happy to review this one. Bruxton (talk) 22:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Questions

? can you combine the sentence which is all lone in the lead?  Fixed

? in Background - "The building sits" may be too colloquial for an encyclopedia  Fixed

? Building is repeated in the lead sentence, also "building which was" and change which to "that"  Fixed

? History - "minimize loss " should add a determiner like "the" before loss  Fixed

? "Menomonee River in order to cool the building" change "in order to" to just "to"  Fixed

Completed these and I also added a citation for the note. Lightburst (talk) 00:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Citations

• Y Spot checked citations and Earwig only alerts to titles, names and quotes 16.7%.

Chart

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.	Yes
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Yes
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.	Yes
	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).	Yes
	2c. it contains no original research.	Yes
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Yes
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.	Yes
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes
	7. Overall assessment.	Well done, I like the use of conversion templates

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.