# Talk:Century 21 Exposition

Generally we use square feet today to indicate the size of a building, making it easy to misread the following sentence and conclude that it's possible to do a lot in 400 square feet -- I wonder if it should be changed to "160,000 square foot"?
"In the end, he got exactly enough of a budget to design and build a four-hundred-foot-square building suitable to hold a variety of exhibition spaces and equally suitable for later conversion to a sports arena and convention facility"
96.252.229.220 (talk) 21:48, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
I think it's fine. People can still understand what they are saying. --Sandstorm120 (talk) 02:01, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

The Official Guide Book to the fair credits the wax figures in the Paris Spectacular to the "Edart Museum in Paris". I don't know what that is, and can find nothing online. Does anyone know more about this? - Jmabel | Talk 05:37, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article does a good job of covering the bases, and while I think it just barely has enough depth, it's nearly at GA status. However, there are some minor structural repairs and copyediting that needs to be done first. I'm going to put it on hold for a week, so these repairs can be completed. If they're not, it will be failed on 24 November.
Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 
Needs some work. There are a number of one-sentence paragraphs, and the organization is odd. I assume the "World of Commerce and Industry" as a major heading is a mistake? The tiny subsections at the bottom ("Exhibit Fair", "Food and Favors", etc) should be combined into a longer and less-stubby section. There are also a number of sentences with awkward phrasing. One example: "Despite the plan to build for the long term for a civic center, more than half of the fair structures were torn down after the fair ended." Here, "for" is repeated twice in the first clause, and "fair" twice in the second. A thorough copyedit would bring this up to the GA bar.
Yes, "World of Commerce and Industry" as a major heading was a mistake, now fixed. I'll see what I can do on the rest of the above. "Exhibit Fair", "Food and Favors" were given their own sections because they were each an official section of the fair (see the list in the fifth paragraph of Buildings and grounds). I doubt there is much of interest to say about them, and I can certainly combine some sections here, but I was trying to parallel the official structure of the fair. - Jmabel | Talk 03:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
That makes sense for the larger items, but I think when we get down to the smaller bits, mixing them into a paragraph looks better and more encyclopedic than a run of tiny stubby subsections. I also think that given the fact that there are sections for each, the description in "Buildings and Grounds" doesn't need a list of these. Neither is a big deal, however. – Scartol • Tok 12:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
B. MoS compliance: 
No major violations, aside from the above, some of which strays into MoS territory.
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 
Could use more depth, but it's sufficient for a GA, in my opinion
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 
So far as I can tell, having no experience with the subject. The Cold War context is interesting and well-NPOVed.
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 
The images are all right-aligned, which is distracting. Staggered images would be more appealing. That you made a map on your own is a commendable sign of dedication.
Funny, I find having them jump around left & right distracting. I think that's a matter of taste. Feel free to move any to the left where you feel it would be an improvement; no point to my taking it on, since I don't feel it would be. - Jmabel | Talk 03:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Meh. Your call. – Scartol • Tok 12:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
On hold until 24 November. – Scartol • Tok 01:07, 18 November 2007 (UTC) Insofar as a copyedit has been done and the prose style and formatting are now in good shape, I'm promoting it to GA status. – Scartol • Tok 12:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

This anonymous edit with no summary added Tommy Bartlett's Water Ski Sky and Stage Show without adding a citation. Effectively, it looks as if it is cited for by my citation at the end of the paragraph. I don't have that source handly at the moment. I can't say for sure whether they were there or not; I've never heard of waterskiing in Memorial Stadium, but I guess it could (barely) be done. Anyway, either the citation should be checked for this, or it should be removed. - Jmabel | Talk 04:08, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/pacificnw/2001/0930/nowthen.html: the Clarion Apartment House, once the Woman's Home Association's Sarah B. Yesler Home for "working girls and women," then a hospital, then an apartment house. Probably was the last surviving work of pioneer Seattle architect James Nestor. On the site that is now the Seattle Rep's Bagley Wright Theater. Might merit mention. - Jmabel | Talk 06:47, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I posted some photos of a glass and coin from the Century 21 Exposition on my Flickr site. http://www.flickr.com/photos/27748767@N08/ Use them for this article etc, I'm declaring these images public domain. Bizzybody (talk) 09:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

This article has some broken links.  I intend to remove or replace them as well as add a link to the Seattle Public Library's Century 21 Digital Collection which contains over 1800 related photos, advertisements, reports, programs, postcards, brochures, and more.  If no one objects, I will perform these edits next week on 10/14/2013. SternaAlbifrons (talk) 00:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Century 21 Exposition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080227000311/http://www.seattlecenter.com/images/media/pdf/SC%20CampusWalkingTour.pdf to http://www.seattlecenter.com/images/media/pdf/SC%20CampusWalkingTour.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090603233854/http://www.seattleschools.org/area/historybook/index.dxml to http://www.seattleschools.org/area/historybook/index.dxml
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100607192530/http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/ContextQueenAnneStatement2005.pdf to http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/ContextQueenAnneStatement2005.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100607192530/http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/ContextQueenAnneStatement2005.pdf to http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/ContextQueenAnneStatement2005.pdf
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081031053514/http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/ContextCityOwnedHistoricResourcesSurveyReport.pdf to http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/preservation/ContextCityOwnedHistoricResourcesSurveyReport.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:19, 12 May 2017 (UTC)