Jump to content

Talk:AMA Plaza

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:20, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This building's design was nearly copied from the Seagram Building. There should be a section discussing that and the architecture which justified designation as a landmark. Sedimentary (talk)

Movie appearances

[edit]

I'm pretty sure that this building also appeared in the 1998 film Mercury Rising. Shouldn't this be included in the article under In Film? Hurricanekiller1994 (talk) 22:51, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should we move the article to AMA Plaza?

[edit]

Since the article states that the building has been renamed the AMA Plaza should the article be moved to AMA Plaza? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed: Nobody in Chicago refers to it that way. We'd need a reliable reference for it.

Langham

[edit]

The Hotel should probably be given its own section in the article. SecretName101 (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here.No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Dclemens1971 talk 22:13, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The IBM Building
The IBM Building
5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 743 past nominations.

Epicgenius (talk) 02:50, 23 August 2025 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Hello Epicgenius! The article started with 2,902 characters on 12 August (Special:Diff/1305431647) and has been expanded to an impressive 45,000 characters by 22 August (Special:Diff/1307176554), which is about 16 times the original length. You submitted the nomination on 23 August, and the article was at 46,000 characters (Special:Diff/1307342613), well-qualified for DYK. This is an excellently detailed, well-composed, and well-sourced article, and I really enjoyed reading it. Earwig shows only an 11.5% similarity and it is copyvio-free. Spotchecked sources 21, 60, 97, 178, and 237 and found no issues. QPQ done. I prefer ALT0, it is pretty hilarious, and the source supports it. Looks good to go! —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 16:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.


This review is transcluded from Talk:AMA Plaza/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 13:51, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Crystalite13 (talk · contribs) 22:17, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]


Hello Epicgenius! Yikes, you have a LOT of articles waiting in review. I'll be working on clearing them out!

Prose

[edit]

Wow, the prose is very impressive! I can't find one thing to comment about! Crystalite13 (talk) 00:08, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

concluding the review with a spotcheck, good job, absolutely no doubt this meets all GA critera! Crystalite13 (talk) 00:09, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]

checkY All good here!

Site

[edit]

checkY All good here!

History

[edit]

checkY All good here!

Development

[edit]

Planning

[edit]

checkY All good here!

Construction

[edit]

checkY

IBM occupancy

[edit]

1970s

[edit]

checkY

1980s and 1990s

[edit]

checkY

2000s

[edit]

checkY

Post-IBM occupancy

[edit]

checkY

Split ownership and renovations

[edit]

checkY

Mid-2010s to present =

[edit]

checkY

Architecture

[edit]

checkY

Form and facade

[edit]

checkY

Base

[edit]

checkY

Upper stories

[edit]

checkY

Structural and mechanical features

[edit]

checkY

Foundation and superstructure

[edit]

checkY

Mechanical systems

[edit]

checkY

Interior

[edit]

checkY

Lobby

[edit]

checkY

Office stories

[edit]

checkY

Hotel

[edit]

checkY

Impact

[edit]

checkY

Reception

[edit]

checkY

Landmark designations

[edit]

All good here! checkY

Awards and influence

[edit]

checkY Good here!

Stable

[edit]

checkY Good here!

Neutral

[edit]

checkY Good here!

Sources

[edit]

Spotcheck

[edit]
Ref 1: checkY
Ref 5: checkY
Ref 130: checkY
Ref 131: checkY
Ref 17: checkY

Copyvio

[edit]

Earwig Copyvio seems fine!

Media

[edit]

All images are tagged and are appropriate!

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.