Talk:Tokyo Tower/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch Fail I do not believe that Tokyo Tower meets the Good Article Criteria for the following reasons:

1. Not factually accurate and verifiable Per an unreferenced paragraph. Also, the article could use more in-text citations.
2. Not broad enough in coverage Both the articles Appearance and Facilities sections are at least as long-if not longer-than its Construction and History section. I think that the Construction and History section should certainly be expanded before being assigned GA status.

However, I also think that the article meets the following Good Article Criterion:

1. Well written The prose appears to be NPOV and generally free of jargon and other problems.
2. Neutral Per first part of above and no disputes on the talk page.
3. Stable No edits lately that aren't minor, uncontroversial changes.
4. Illustrated Per pictures on the article.

ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 02:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Uh, why didn't you give me a period of time to respond to your review in an attempt to rectify the problems your cited? --Torsodog^Talk 13:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)