445:
own too much stuff. The article has been largely scrubbed of content relating to its denial of legitimate insurance claims, non compliant marketing of insurance services, and its failure to provide adequate security to its ordinary everyday paying customers. It is understandable but disappointing that a declared paid editor should reshape this article in such a fashion, but completely shocking that a GA reviewer would rubber stamp it. I register my objection here.
278:
170:
492:
clearly either didn't understand the criteria or didn't have the tools to apply them in all areas. There's no particular crime in this—we all learn as we go—but your insistence that the article even now meets the GA criteria calls into question your fitness as a GA reviewer and as a judge of the other issues being raised. The fact that you're focusing on the REIT acronym, which I don't believe
395:
386:
377:
269:
42:
236:
194:
465:
The objection Cullen raises with respect to the REIT acronym was only broached by him/her post-GA; despite the fact he/she was active on this article for more than a year, during which the offending acronym was present. This suggests, to me, his/her concerns are being dramatized for the purposes of derailing an article on the basis of
464:
I disagree with the characterization of "rubber stamping." GA criteria offer several points of assessment and articles are evaluated on those points. GA is not a means of divining scientific truth, nor is there an expectation reviewers by SMEs. The article met, and continues to meet, the GA criteria.
332:
I included it because it had a strong source (Associated Press) and the article seemed to imply other sources covered it ("as the news spread"), but it's possible I have a skewed point-of-view, because it is always difficult to completely recover from an attack piece. I don't think it's appropriate
444:
The article has so far undergone a very cursory and brief review. In my opinion, it pushes the corporate investor POV, greatly overemphasizing the REIT business structure. It fails to adequately describe in sufficient detail the company's actual business - the rental of storage space to people who
402:
Yes, technically, though, more images - particularly (a) interior shots, and, (b) non-publicity shots - would be nice. There seem to be a number of CC-available images of the interior of PS locations on Flickr, though I understand the nature of the nominator's relationship with PS will probably
491:
meet the GA criteria—in particular the prose, given extensive punctuation issues, including inconsistent (and often incorrect) usage in otherwise identical phrases that should always be fixed before a GA is listed—the above denial rings hollow indeed. You were reviewing your first GAs, and you
496:
has questioned (he certainly didn't in this section), rather than that he believes there is far more emphasis than necessary on the REIT business structure and not enough on the actual storage business of the company, is telling. Cullen328, I think the only option at this point is a
288:
to mold and theft. The WSJ article seems to be using PS to examine an industry-phenomenon; I searched independently and could not find a substantial body of RS that supports the idea this issue is unique to PS. This would be more appropriate to an article on self-storage,
298:
It looks like only the first sentence is about the industry in general and the rest is specific to PS. Especially since the WSJ heavily focuses on PS, I thought it was reasonable to add context that it was an industry-wide problem.
418:? I actually took it out originally because I thought there were too many. I put it back in just now. I can try Flickr too - not sure why that would be a problem - but this one looks good.
80:
47:
70:
126:
122:
52:
107:
156:
99:
75:
222:
The second sentence in "Self-storage and other services" is complex and difficult to understand without reading several times.
319:
Highlighting the specific issue explained in the last sentence of the second paragraph in the same section seems
333:
for me to remove it directly due to WP:COI. Do you mind doing the honors? Or I can submit a
Request Edit.
506:
466:
423:
338:
304:
248:
205:
520:
474:
451:
356:
150:
115:
17:
403:
preclude him from personally uploading them. Perhaps someone else can. Also, historical images.
177:
502:
419:
348:
334:
320:
300:
285:
244:
201:
516:
493:
484:
470:
446:
352:
146:
92:
498:
415:
277:
169:
176:
In some instances a percent sign (%) is used in lieu of the word "percent" (see
394:
385:
376:
268:
524:
510:
478:
458:
427:
360:
342:
308:
252:
209:
160:
501:, as you believe the article is not at the point that it should be listed.
515:
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree. Thanks for your feedback.
323:. (I understand the point is to example the previous sentence.)
284:
The third paragraph in "Self-storage and other services" gives
487:, you had been informed an hour prior that the article did
265:
2. Is the article verifiable with no original research?
134:
103:
469:, where "it" - in this case - is Public Storage.
8:
347:Yes, I've made these changes and passed it,
30:
274:3. Is the article broad in its coverage?
61:
33:
7:
483:Since at the time you posted this,
24:
393:
384:
375:
276:
267:
234:
192:
168:
166:1. Is the article well-written?
391:6. Is the article illustrated?
1:
545:
525:17:37, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
511:17:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
479:08:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
459:07:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
428:02:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
373:4. Is the article neutral?
361:05:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
343:03:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
309:03:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
253:02:19, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
210:02:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
161:01:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
499:good article reassessment
382:5. Is the article stable?
18:Talk:Public Storage
89:
88:
536:
456:
454:Let's discuss it
397:
388:
379:
280:
271:
242:
238:
237:
200:
196:
195:
172:
139:
130:
111:
43:Copyvio detector
31:
544:
543:
539:
538:
537:
535:
534:
533:
452:
442:
235:
233:
193:
191:
120:
97:
91:
85:
57:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
542:
540:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
527:
467:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
441:
440:Major concerns
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
430:
405:
404:
398:
389:
380:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
325:
324:
316:
315:
314:
313:
312:
311:
291:
290:
272:
262:
261:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
224:
223:
219:
218:
217:
216:
215:
214:
213:
212:
182:
181:
140:
87:
86:
84:
83:
78:
73:
67:
64:
63:
59:
58:
56:
55:
53:External links
50:
45:
39:
36:
35:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
541:
526:
522:
518:
514:
513:
512:
508:
504:
500:
495:
490:
486:
482:
481:
480:
476:
472:
468:
463:
462:
461:
460:
457:
455:
450:
449:
439:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
406:
401:
400:
399:
396:
392:
387:
383:
378:
374:
362:
358:
354:
350:
346:
345:
344:
340:
336:
331:
330:
329:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
317:
310:
306:
302:
297:
296:
295:
294:
293:
292:
287:
283:
282:
281:
279:
275:
270:
266:
254:
250:
246:
241:
232:
231:
230:
229:
228:
227:
226:
225:
221:
220:
211:
207:
203:
199:
190:
189:
188:
187:
186:
185:
184:
183:
179:
175:
174:
173:
171:
167:
163:
162:
158:
155:
152:
148:
145:
141:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
82:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
68:
66:
65:
60:
54:
51:
49:
46:
44:
41:
40:
38:
37:
32:
26:
19:
488:
453:
447:
443:
390:
381:
372:
371:
273:
264:
263:
239:
197:
165:
164:
153:
143:
142:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
90:
81:Instructions
503:BlueMoonset
104:visual edit
420:CorporateM
414:How about
349:CorporateM
335:CorporateM
301:CorporateM
289:generally.
245:CorporateM
202:CorporateM
178:WP:PERCENT
48:Authorship
34:GA toolbox
517:LavaBaron
494:Cullen328
485:LavaBaron
471:LavaBaron
353:LavaBaron
147:LavaBaron
144:Reviewer:
71:Templates
62:Reviewing
27:GA Review
321:WP:UNDUE
286:WP:UNDUE
243:Better?
157:contribs
76:Criteria
127:history
108:history
94:Article
448:Cullen
136:Watch
16:<
521:talk
507:talk
475:talk
424:Talk
416:this
357:talk
339:Talk
305:Talk
249:Talk
240:Done
206:Talk
198:Done
151:talk
123:edit
100:edit
489:not
523:)
509:)
477:)
426:)
359:)
351:.
341:)
307:)
251:)
208:)
180:).
159:)
125:|
106:|
102:|
519:(
505:(
473:(
422:(
355:(
337:(
303:(
247:(
204:(
154:·
149:(
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
