# Talk:Los Arcos Mall

This review is transcluded from Talk:Los Arcos Mall/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jeromi Mikhael (talk · contribs) 07:29, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
I will review this article in a few days. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 07:29, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


### Inquiries and suggestions
@Sammi Brie:


### Infobox
Opening date: It would be better if you put both dates in the infobox: October 20, 1969 (anchor store)<br>November 21, 1969 (official)
Done
Closing date: Similar to the opening date, put both dates in the infobox: 1995 (official)<br>February 1999 (last store)
The mall didn't close in 1995, so this is wrong


#### Lead
Explain the meaning of Los Arcos, as mentioned in citation #5. Probably make a new section for the name?
Done


#### Mall history
After construction began in October 1968 - source says ceremony marking construction start of the construction's first key building was held on 29 September - probably change it to late September 1968
September 29 (Sunday) source says the ceremony is Tuesday (Oct. 1)
First paragraph: mention Kitchell Contractors who constructed the center
not sure if contractor really belongs in text. This mall had two GCs, one for the anchor stores and one for the remainder of the property.
an open-air center - no mention in the citation?
Citation added
#4 is cited twice for a single chain of sentence - is it necessary?
better safe than sorry here, imo
Among the inline tenants was a movie theater on the lower level; three out-parcel buildings were built for the two anchors' automotive centers and a First Federal Savings and Loan office. - Note that this sentence's source was made before the building was completed - it would be better if you mention that these were "planned".
Changed (though these were all built)
1,000,000-square-foot (93,000 m2)-plus Fiesta Mall - no mention about this in the sources
Source added
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community - Indian Community -> Reserve?
Not in this case. You might notice that's where the article is.
Equity Properties of Chicago - expand to equity properties and development company of chicago
Done
The Broadway - is this referring to the broadway-hale stores?
Yes, the stores themselves were always known as The Broadway though the corporate parent had once been known as Broadway-Hale. (Responses from here up: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 15:47, 12 June 2021 (UTC))
@Sammi Brie: If that's the case then please harmonize the naming for the stores or clarify the relation between the two (e.g. The Broadway (owned by Broadway-Hale) or Broadway-Hale (corporate parent of The Broadway).
 Done


#### Hockey arena proposal
but it was not until the end of 1996 that a potential buyer emerged: the Phoenix-based Ellman Companies, - could this sentence be reworded to remove the colon? Colon is not recommended to be used in conjunction with the dash.
 Done
A year later, Ellman presented three revised plans. One of them was for a $140 million hockey arena to house the Phoenix Coyotes of the National Hockey League, along with proposals for a power center and an updated version of the 1997 concept.[19] The plan including the arena and power center survived[20] and was unveiled to the public on September 28, with a cost of $600 million. - this sentence is kind of confusing. Are the power center and the updated 1997 version part of a single plan or are these separated?
Reworded for clarity. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 19:14, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Clarify the relation between Steve Ellman and The Ellman Companies.
 Done
Since there are two Ellmans here (Steve Ellman and The Ellman Companies), please replace Ellmans that were referred to with he with Steve Ellman per WP:NCP.
 Done


#### Los Arcos Town Center proposal
The collapse of the Los Arcos arena plan put Scottsdale back at the drawing board on plans to reuse the property. - replace Scottsdale with Scottsdale city
 Done
That January, Ellman, which still owned the property, proposed a shopping center to be anchored by Walmart, Sam's Club, and Lowe's. Since Ellman would be mentioned several more times in this section, please clarify which Ellman in this sentence.
 Done
councilmembers -> council members
It is styled this way in a lot of Arizona municipalities and elsewhere in the US, as a replacement for the gendered "councilman". For instance, [1]
under the banner of "STOP 'EM" -> banner is quite ambiguous here. probably under the "STOP 'EM" group?
The group seemed a bit loose but it is a "group" per the article.
to voters in March 2004 - because this would later be mentioned as the "9 March vote", I think this phrase should be changed to 9 March 2004.
 Done
"administrative" - no mentions about the "administrative" state of the act in the source, even with apostrophe. Could you point this out?
Citation added.


#### SkySong
ASU never appears before this section, yet the university was suddenly mentioned here without any background. Is it possible to elaborate a bit on how did ASU get involved in this matter?
A source has been added to discuss some of this.
In 2004, the city of Scottsdale and the ASU Foundation, the philanthropic arm of Arizona State University, reached a deal: Ellman would sell the land for $41.5 million to the foundation, - Why is Ellman not a part of the deal? How could two parties reach a deal that involves a third party without the third party being involved in the deal. Should it be the city of Scottsdale, the ASU Foundation, and The Ellman Companies?
 Done
(Paragraph 3) Where is SkySong 2? There is no mention about it.
See the last sentence of paragraph 2: the first two office buildings on the property
The university maintains offices and a business incubator in the center. - Should it be The foundation instead?
The offices are for university units. This isn't the only building the ASU Foundation owns where actual university units occupy office space. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:34, 16 June 2021 (UTC)


### General Assessment