Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Morningside Park (Manhattan)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 28 April 2021 [1].

Morningside Park (Manhattan)[edit]

Nominator(s): Epicgenius (talk) 21:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a park in Upper Manhattan, New York City. It is built on a cliff that was deemed too steep to develop upon when Manhattan's grid system was executed. It was first proposed in 1867 but, due to various delays, took three decades to complete. Morningside Park then went through various ups and downs over the years. Besides its topography, the park has some nice art, a waterfall, some paths and plantings, and several fields and playgrounds used by residents of Harlem and Morningside Heights. Morningside Park was designated as a scenic landmark in 2008. If this passes FAC, this will be the second FA about a scenic landmark in NYC, after Riegelmann Boardwalk.

This was promoted as a Good Article a year ago thanks to an excellent GA review from Lee Vilenski. After a much-appreciated copy edit by Twofingered Typist, I think it's up to FA quality now. Epicgenius (talk) 21:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - a bit trivial, but the image in the "Columbia athletic complex" section is almost precisely the same shot as the one in the "Bordering streets" section, just taken in a different season and a lot less sharp. It just feels like a lower-quality duplicate. Guettarda (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:Morningside_retainer_116_jeh.JPG is missing a caption, and why include two very similar pictures of the retaining wall?
    • @Guettarda and Nikkimaria: Thanks for pointing this out (both of you pointed this out similarly). I swapped the image in the athletic complex section with one of brick arches. Epicgenius (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest scaling up File:Morningside_Park,_New_York,_N._Y_(NYPL_b12647398-69897).tiff
    • Done. I also cropped the image to a 16:9 ratio.
  • File:Morningside_Park_Aug_2019_57.jpg: what is the copyright status of the monument? Ditto File:Carl_Schurz_Morningside_116_jeh.JPG. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:00, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lafayette and Washington (1900) and Carl Schurz Monument (1913) are public domain in the United States. I will tag them accordingly. Epicgenius (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Guettarda[edit]

Lead
  • The lead seems short to me, given the length of the article
  • sentence 4: "several rock outcroppings" - isn't the cliff a rock outcropping, and if so, shouldn't this be other rock outcroppings?
  • The mention of protests in response to the construction of the gym seems to be missing a "why".
    • I've added some explanation as to the protests. Epicgenius (talk) 19:19, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
History
  • Site: sentence 2: "smoothed during glacial periods" seeks overly vague, given that there have several over the last 3 billion or so years
    • I've specified these glacial periods specifically applied to the last million years. Epicgenius (talk) 19:19, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • para 2, sentence 4: "Johannes de la Montagne, who was among the first settlers". Given that you refer to the Lenape as the initial settlers, should this be "Dutch settlers" (or whatever ethnicity he was)
    • I think he was of Huguenot descent, per this link, or a Protestant from France per this link. However, neither are although it's not exactly an FA quality source. I instead clarified that he was among the first European settlers, as his ancestry is not too important to the narrative of the park. Epicgenius (talk) 23:52, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • para 3, sentence 6: the juxtaposition of "owned by several families...several of whom also owned slaves" feels a little weird to me. The idea ownership of land and of people put so matter-of-factly alongside each other. Something like "occupied by several families and their slaves" or "occupied by several families...several of whom were slaveholders" or better yet, "enslaved Africans" or African Americans (assuming that's verifiable)
    • Done.
Design and construction
  • At the least first time that $ is mentioned, I think you should specify US$
    • Done.
Beginning of construction
  • These three paragraphs are too long, wordy, and blow by blow. The writing could be tighter - some of the language in there is just filler. (TBH, the language could be tightened up throughout)
    • Apparently, the paragraphs were supposed to be four paragraphs. Nonetheless, I've reworded unnecessary wording throughout. Epicgenius (talk) 19:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Early and mid-20th centuries & 1950s and 1960s controversies
  • I think there's an undertone of race here that leaves me wondering whether this attitude to the park and its proximity to Harlem is reasonable, racist, or some combination of both. I'm not saying that we need to delve into that in the article itself, but I do think that we need to at least include a link, a reference or a note acknowledging this.
  • This is even more true when you get to the discussion of segregation and sit-ins.
Recreational features
  • Plant family names (Magnoliaceae, Ranunculaeae, Berberidaceae) are not italicised
    • Removed.
Art
  • Carl Schurz Monument and Seligman fountain are italicised in the text, but not in the photo caption. It should be consistent
    • Done.
Bordering streets
  • "All of the sidewalks were asphalt until 1911, but today they consist of Belgian blocks and concrete" - "now" isn't time-bounded, and should be, especially when it's supported by a 2008-vintage source
    • Fixed.

Guettarda (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Guettarda: Thanks for the comments. I've addressed these now. Epicgenius (talk) 23:52, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It looks good enough for me to support. Nice work! Guettarda (talk) 22:14, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment[edit]

More than two weeks in and no non-image comments on the article. If this has not changed significantly by the time it hits three weeks the nomination is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

At the risk of doing a broken record imitation, a lack of significant further indication of a consensus to promote forming by the four week mark may have unfortunate results. If you can call in a favour or two, now is the time to do so. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:05, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Lee Vilenski[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

Lede
  • A cliff of Manhattan schist - There's something missing here, or I'm reading this wrong. Maybe it's "off"? Still doesn't read right. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • "A cliff made of Manhattan schist" is what I was going for. I have
  • although a nonprofit group, Friends of Morningside Park, helps maintain it. - I'm not sure how it being nonprofit makes any difference? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Removed.
  • facilities such as softball diamonds, - maybe we could just say "softball facilities" or similar? Diamonds is pretty indepth if someone's never heard of softball; and we aren't linking to softball the game Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would ordinarily agree with your assessment. However, it is part of a longer quote ("recreational facilities such as softball diamonds, basketball courts, and playgrounds"). In this case, these are three examples of sporting fields or play areas that were installed in the park. I have rephrased it to "sporting fields and playgrounds". Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, that's fine. I was just attempting to avoid the "diamond" aspect. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cathedral Parkway–110th Street in infobox has a slighly different wording in the linked article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The infobox links to "Bus", but it's a redirect. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed.
Prose
  • (Part of this creek in modern Central Park, dubbed Montayne's Rivulet, was also named after de la Montagne.[8][10]) - should this be a note instead, rather than brackets?Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first such fort - the link here has an unnecessary disambig. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed.
  • "Path in Morningside Park", could we maybe get a slightly better caption? It's not very descriptive,and doesn't show why the picture is in the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same with "the south end of the park", and "park entrance". Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • On that note, unless I'm reading it wrong (understandably, it's quite long), isn't there quite a few different entrances? 11 in total were suggested and approved, but later it is mentioned there is another one - I lost count. How many in total? Might be worth mentioning the total when you discuss this later in the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are at least 17 entrances: seven each on the western and eastern borders, as well as one each at the northwestern, southwestern, and southeastern corners. This calculation was made per WP:CALC, since the source did not say directly. This map may imply there are more, but the source counted each intersection as a single entrance, regardless of whether it contained one or two paths. If each ramp and stair is counted separately, there may be as many as 22. Unlike Central Park, Morningside Park doesn't name its entrances, so it's very hard to tell for sure. Epicgenius (talk) 19:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it would be nice to add the amount somewhere, as we do mention the amount planned at several places, so CALC is fine, but I do think it needs to be in the article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list..

Favour called in. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    • Happy to support. I just have one question, but it's not enough to oppose a great article. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Willbb234[edit]

  • several athletic fields to 'several atheltics fields' (see below for some more comments on this).
    • I believe this may be a case of WP:ENGVAR. As far as I know, "athletic field" (singular) appears to be the common American usage. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the introduction, you wikilink the second mention of 'playgrounds', but not the first.
    • Fixed.
  • Who or what is 'Columbia'? If it refers to Columbia University, then you should use this name and wikilink as it is the first time it is mentioned.
    • Added - thanks for pointing it out. This refers to Columbia University, but I had thought this was mentioned earlier. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Manhattan was settled initially by the Lenape Native Americans do we have an approximate time period for this? The paragraph previously talks about glacial movements that happened millions of years ago so this could be confusing to a reader.
    • I'm not sure when exactly the Lenape arrived, though it is likely they would have arrived no earlier than 9,000 years ago. I just clarified that it was several thousand years ago. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • between 109th and 124th Street. did these streets exist in 1658? If not, then you could say 'between what is now 109th and 124th Street' for clarification.
  • Colonial forces used... wikilink to the appropriate article, I suggest British Army.
    • Done.
  • You should wikilink to the first mention of Central Park instead of the mention under 'Initial plans'.
    • Fixed.
  • under which 31.238 acres (12.642 ha) was acquired for Morningside Park and 0.018 acres (73 m2) were condemned at a cost of US$1.33 million not sure what is being said here, maybe I'm just not reading it right. I'm confused by the use of the word 'condemned' here as I can't see how it fits.
  • The Times should the 'The' be in italics as well?

More to come. I need a break first. Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 21:06, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Morningside Park would be designed to emphasize scenery and its proximity to Central Park not sure how it can be designed "to emphasize... its proximity to Central Park"? This might need explaining.
    • The southern part of Morningside Park is one block from the northern side of Central Park. I have clarified this. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • overlook bays what is this? Do you mean 'overlooking bays' or something along the lines of Scenic viewpoint?
    • The latter, as the current design contains terraces that overlook Harlem. I've added a link. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In July, a group of Civil War veterans stayed in the park during the Independence Day weekend, firing cannons and pretending to storm the blockhouse walls you could include that this was a reenactment (Historical reenactment) if the sources imply or say this.
    • Done.
  • though this did not come to pass this wording strikes me as overly formal or somewhat dated.
    • Fixed.
  • In 1913, Carl Schurz Memorial to "In 1913, the Carl Schurz Memorial".
    • Done.
  • Other issues were caused by a large Independence Day celebration in 1912, this is quite vague. You should try to say what issues and how, if that information is available.
    • Done. The celebration was not the only cause of the erosion and decay, but I've added this. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In its annual report of 1929, NYC Parks you haven't already introduced NYC Parks. It looks as if it is the same thing as New York City Department of Parks and Recreation, in which case NYC Parks should be placed in parentheses the first time the organisation is mentioned.
    • Done. This is indeed the NYC Parks Department's abbreviation. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • as signs of a racial problem. quite vague here.
    • Clarified.
  • reported that Teachers College of Columbia University should this read "reported that the Teachers College of Columbia University"?
    • Done.
  • You say 113th and 114th Streets where 'Streets' is plural, but earlier you say 109th and 124th Street where 'Street' is singular. Some consistency is needed.
    • Fixed.
  • Wikilink to softball.
    • Done.

More to come. Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 21:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "the park was virtually off-bounds to [Columbia University] students and faculty as "too dangerous'.” not sure what's going on with the speech marks here. One is curly and the others don't add up (single and double mixed).
    • Fixed. I'm not sure why there was a curly quote. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further on from my mention of 'athletic' to 'athletics' in the lede, in the section 'Columbia athletic complex', my understanding is that 'athletics' is a noun that refers to sports as a whole (in some cases to track and field), while 'athletic' is an adjective. See Sport of athletics and [2]. At this point, I think both make perfect sense in the context, but it's just a question of what you think would be best. I also could be completely wrong and be talking about British-English instead of American-English.
    • Yeah. I think this may be an American-specific usage, like I mentioned earlier. However, in regard to this specific issue, "athletic" is indeed being used as an adjective. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Willbb234: Thanks for the comments. I really appreciate these, and I have addressed or replied to all of them. Epicgenius (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • of which alumnus Francis S. Levien donated $1 million in May 1962. I suggest changing this to $1 million of which was donated by alumnus Francis S. Levien in May 1962.
    • Done.
  • that it was given the nickname "Muggingside Park" by whom?
    • Added.
  • The abbreviation 'LPC' needs to be placed in parentheses next to New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission.
    • Done.
  • drew up plans for a $12-million why does '12' and 'million' have a dash between?
    • Removed.
  • who died in 1996 to "who had died in 1996".
    • Done.
  • Going back to the 'Final plans and completion' section, you should add a wikilink to Riverside Park (Manhattan).
    • Done.
  • Since then, additional improvements have taken place within the park. Additional trees were planted in the park in 2009, including a sequoia tree these two sentences can likely be combined into one. The phrase "within the park" can be removed as this is implied given the previous sentences. A semi-colon can be placed between the two statements.
    • Done.
  • Two years later, NYC Parks presented a plan to restore the northern section and add a playground there. do we have any details on whether this went ahead. I can't tell if you are implying this in the next sentence.
    • Done. I have added a few sources about when it was completed. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Morningside Dog Run is an enclosed space for dog owners to bring their dogs to play. happy doggies!
    • Yep. A lot of parks have these, and they're generally nice to play around in. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You should wikilink the first mention of arboretum.
    • Done.
  • was built in 1903–1904 and destroyed in 1952. why was it 'destroyed'. This implies some kind of vandalism/incident. If this isn't the case, how about 'removed' or 'dismantled'?
    • Done. I sometimes use "destroyed" and "demolished" interchangeably, but it may be just me. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wikilink to Marcus Garvey Park.
    • Added.
  • A tablet was placed on the site by the Women's Auxiliary of the American Scenic and Historic Preservation Society in 1904; part of the cliff was destroyed in 1915 I can't tell if these two statements are supposed to be linked.
  • Residents and visitors to the pond these two terms I would associate with humans. Are there more appropriate terms you can think of?
    • I have rephrased the sentence.
  • both in uniform and holding hands 'holding hands' struck me as an odd phrase here. The source [3] says "clasping hands", perhaps implying they're shaking hands, also implied by the image [4]. I don't know what phrasing you want to use, but 'holding hands' doesn't seem quite right.
    • I reworded it to shaking hands. This is largely synonymous with "clasping", based on the context, but doesn't copy directly. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The group is atop there are only two of them, so how about 'the pair'?
    • Done.
  • The Marcus Garvey Park is wikilinked in the 'Management' section. This should be removed per my above comment about wikilinking earlier on.
    • Removed.
  • Alright, so I'm confused about some of the organisations here. The MAA was set up and attempted to reorganize the Friends group (A portion was used to assess what the park needed done most urgently, while a second portion went to reorganize the largely dismantled Friends volunteer group.). In the management section you say that the park is maintained by the Friends group, implying that the group didn't really dismantle (or if it did, it was able to reorganize successfully). However, there is no mention of the MAA in the management section. So I'm confused about the role of the MAA. Were they simply a temporary organisation to help the failing Friends group, were they a separate organisation which at some point ceased to exist, or are they still about but are not mentioned in the management section?
    • Basically, the Morningside Area Alliance still exists, but it is a neighborhood group, not a park-specific group. This is why it's not mentioned in "Management", as its focus is largely on the neighborhood rather than the park. As for the Friends group, it was "largely" dismantled, but a better wording would probably be "disorganized" or something similar. It didn't cease to exist at the time, but had shrunken from its largest extent. I have made that change. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding the New York Post, I see it is considered unreliable at WP:RSP although I did see your comment at the RFC ([5]) saying that it is good for real estate articles. I will presume it is fine here, especially as there is very little, if anything, relating to politics

That's all I have to say. I'm happy to support once said comments are addressed. If an in depth source review is conducted and issues are found, I may change this decision, but I doubt that will happen. Kind regards, Willbb234Talk (please {{ping}} me in replies) 14:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Willbb234: Thanks again for the comments. I have addressed all the comments you've left above. Epicgenius (talk) 17:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass[edit]

I see this needs a source review. Will contribute one soon, might claim for wikicup points. Hog Farm Talk 02:39, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Location needed for Kadinsky 2016
    • Done.
  • "Olmsted, Frederick Law; Vaux, Calvert; New York (N.Y.). (1887). General plan for the improvement of Morningside Park. New York?: s.n.] Archived from the original on August 1, 2019. Retrieved July 30, 2019." - I think you can drop the ]
    • Done.
  • Need publisher and location for Bolton
    • Done.
  • Need location for Dolkart, Pierce, Pirsson, and Stokes
    • Done.
  • drop the p. 175 from Stokes, as you also cite other pages in the short citations
    • Done.
  • Worldcat has OCLCs for Bolton, Hall, Pierce, and Pirsson
    • Done.

Sources all look reliable for what they are citing. Will put spot checks on the FAC talk page. Hog Farm Talk 04:34, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks have been posted at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Morningside Park (Manhattan)/archive1#Spot checks. Hog Farm Talk 04:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: Thanks. I have fixed all of these and have responded on this nomination's talk page. Epicgenius (talk) 23:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Morningside_Park_(Manhattan)/archive1&oldid=1020314062"