Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Peer review/Hoffmann Architects

Hoffmann Architects

I am new to Wikipedia, having only made minor edits to existing articles before composing one. I am hoping for feedback on both the content and organization of this article. Hoffmann Architects is notable primarily for their restoration of major architectural icons, for which they have won a number of awards. Have I made their relationship to these buildings clear? How might I improve the description of what, specifically, the firm's role is in conserving significant architecture?

In addition, I welcome suggestions for further categories of information to provide. I have examined a number of other articles on architects and architectural practices, but I am still unclear on which headings and information is standard. Any help on adding images would be useful, too. Thanks in advance for guiding a new Wikipedian interested in the field of remedial architecture through writing her first article!

--SenchaDragon (talk) 17:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

• Comments from Sionk (talk) 12:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I had a hand in some early edits of this article when it was not in a good state. Now (after your improvements) it seems to be an good example, relative to most other articles about architecture practices. I particularly like the fact the notable projects are all sourced, which is a rare occurrence indeed!

The major problem I see is that the "Practice" section, being sourced almost exclusively from the Hoffmann website, could be seen as self-promotional. Descriptions of companies need to be based on independent, reliable sources. Evidently, the 2011 Hartford Business Journal article gives plenty of information to base a description of the current practice.

Generally I would say that, though the article has plenty of sources (many of which aid verification), it lacks (like many other articles about companies) suffcient general news coverage to pass WP:CORPDEPTH. But the proliferation of WP:IRS, the verified list of awards and the general lack of excessive WP:PUFF will mean it's very unlikely to be nominated for deletion (certainly not by me!).

Hope that helps!

• Reply from SenchaDragon (talk) 18:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I appreciated all of your help early on, especially as I was then new to Wikipedia, along with your feedback now. It looks like others have helped with the citations in the "Practice" section, as well. General news coverage additions are a good bit of advice. I'm hoping that other editors will be able to contribute there, as well. Great to be a part of WikiProject Architecture, and hoping to contribute to more articles soon.

Thanks for taking this newbie under your wing.