Result: Kept No reason to delist has been given and another editor found no major issuesAIRcorn(talk) 21:34, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This article was never properly reviewed having a flyby note by a new editor on their 12th edit who's not even sure who the nominator or reviewer is. Surprise this "flu" under the radar lol.--Moxy🍁 23:53, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Irrespective of how the reviewer conducted the review, I'm not seeing any major issues here. I'll formally assess this against the GA criteria:
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
The history section is the longest section in the article (I'd estimate conservatively that it is about 60% of the entire article). However, a lot of GA's about architecture topics are like this, especially with a topic whose construction has been as drawn out as the WSCC, so it is focused. As for the other issues, I examined the article and am not seeing any egregious zingers, though maybe there are a few long paragraphs. epicgenius (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment@SounderBruce: Saw you had some activity on the talk page, informing you of this if you did not see it. Kees08 (Talk) 20:08, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]