Talk:280 Broadway/GA1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 14:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at this. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• You should standardize what you capitalize and italicize in "the New York Sun"
  • I think I have done that. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I still see "The building also housed the original New York Sun newspaper from 1919 to 1950" in the lede, "publisher of the New York Sun, purchased the Stewart Building, but otherwise looks good Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I have fixed the first instance of "New York Sun". In the second instance, only Sun is italicized, whereas "New York" is used as an adjective and is not part of the newspaper's name. To me, it would be like referring to Newsday, another NY newspaper, as "New York Newsday". – Epicgenius (talk) 14:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• "It was supported by cast iron on the first floor after 1850" I'm not really sure what this means-- could you clarify, (might not need an article edit, perhaps just an explanation to me here). Maybe consider saying "Cast iron supports were added on the first floor in 1850"?
  • Your interpretation is correct. I have clarified this now. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• " both of which are placed atop pedestals and capped by Corinthian-style capitals" is there anywhere you can link for capitals?
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "before it even opened" I'd drop 'even'
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Marvin Schneider might be worth a red link? Also can you find a more recent source than 1992 to cite "since 1992"? Do we know how the clock was maintained before then?
  • I've added the link, as well as an NYT reference that says he was still employed by the city last year. Sadly, there isn't much info about how the clock was maintained beforehand. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• " Each clock face had an octagonal dial;" why 'had'? Does it not anymore?
  • It still does. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Suggest establishing that ""The Sun / It Shines for All"" is a motto on the first time it is mentioned rather than the second
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "which in turn were topped by capitals signifying the themes of "commerce" and "plenty""
  • Did you have a comment about this? Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Not that I can think of. Just like the look of bullet points, I guess... Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• "This motif was used throughout the store, with various frescoes symbolizing commerce" does this sentence really need three citations? There are a few instances of this-- it might be worth considering if some of the shorter passages (like "with a circumference of 70 ft (21 m).") can have a citation or two cut for readability. Of course not at the sake of verifiability
  • I added multiple sources for some details precisely to demonstrate that this isn't a point of contention. Basically, some of the sources disagree on certain details; for instance, while the sources give different dimensions for the height of the dome, they agree on the circumference of the dome. Nonetheless I've trimmed some of the extra sources. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "The New-York Tribune described the building as "absolutely fireproof"" suggest adding a date to this description
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "At the time, even the largest stores were generally housed in small buildings, and the surrounding neighborhood was largely residential." seems to be disagreement between singular/plural (stores...buildings vs neighborhood was)
  • These are two separate clauses, both of which are in singular/plural agreement with themselves. In other words, if the clauses "The largest stores were generally housed in small buildings" and "The neighborhood was largely residential" were separate sentences, then they would both be grammatically correct. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "Stewart's stature was such that the 1845 book Wealthy Citizens of New York described other dry-goods merchants as "the Stewarts of their day"" Does this really add anything to the article? I think it has been sufficiently established that Stewart was a prominent merchant
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• ", paying about $90,000 to $100,000" total or per lot?
  • In total. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "eading historian Harry E. Resseguie to refer it" perhaps "refer to it as" and suggest adding a year
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk)
• Why "The Herald" but "The New York Evening Post"?
  • I dropped "New York" from the Post. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• " By 1850, the store was prosperous;" was it not before? maybe "still prosperous" or "increasingly prosperous"?
  • It was before. I've changed this to "increasingly prosperous". 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
• "In addition, Stewart asked the" presumably "asked and received"?
  • I've reworded this to clarify that the legislature did grant the exemption. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• " The Marble Palace's sales suffered because of the executor's mismanagement" might be worth explaining what the mismanagement was?
  • Unfortunately, the source doesn't explain the nature of the mismanagement. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Some more to come. As usual, these are just thoughts and suggestions I'm not wedded to any of them. Seems on the balance high quality work as always.

Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891: Thank you for the comments. I've either fixed or replied to all of the issues you've raised so far. Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there a reason why the "Stewart Building" is not included as an alternate name?
  • I've added it now. Epicgenius (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "and erect a skyscraper for his newspapers" you've only mentioned him as the publisher of a single newspaper.
  • Oops. I meant a single newspaper, rather than multiple. Epicgenius (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "William T. Dewart's "other interests" took up space in the building's top story" do you know what these were?
  • Unfortunately, I don't know which of his other businesses occupied 280 Broadway. Epicgenius (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• "When Munsey died" suggest adding year
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Is the sentence beginning "Although it was not originally built for the Sun," necessary? The only reason it would make sense including, to me, would be if the newspaper buildings were consciously designated to be landmarks as a group and solely because of their newspaper histories (which I don't think is the case for 280 Broadway). To put it another way, why do you not mention all other department stores that are landmarks here?
  • I've removed the first part, but I retained the rest of the sentence, as it does seem relevant to mention both newspaper-headquarter and department-store landmarks. You make a good point - the Sun Building wasn't designated as a landmark solely because it housed the Sun, and naturally it would make sense to also mention other department-store buildings that are also landmarks. However, I included this fact because the NY Times did specifically publish a list of newspaper buildings that are NYC landmarks, whereas no reliable secondary source (to my knowledge) has published a list of department stores that are NYC landmarks. Epicgenius (talk) 14:33, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's it for prose. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:25, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do realize this has slipped my mind-- apologies for that. I hope to finish the review by the end of this weekend. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it slipped my mind as well. I was extremely busy during the previous two weeks, so I completely forgot about these issues. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:28, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

image licensing looks good. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:45, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

cited to reliable sources Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 17:50, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecked a number of sources, everything lines up. This would seem to me to meet the GA criteria. Passing, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]