Template:Did you know nominations/Condado Vanderbilt Hotel

The following is an archived discussion of Condado Vanderbilt Hotel's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Miyagawa (talk) 08:23, 20 April 2013 (UTC).

Condado Vanderbilt Hotel

(

)

... that Franklin D. Roosevelt and his wife Eleanor Roosevelt stayed at the Condado Vanderbilt Hotel in San Juan, Puerto Rico during his tenure as president?

Comment: ALT 1: ... that the Condado Vanderbilt Hotel became the first hotel in Puerto Rico to include a casino after gambling was legalized in the 1940s?
Reviewed: List of best-selling Latin albums in the United States

5x expanded by DivaKnockouts (talk). Self nominated at 17:34, 19 March 2013 (UTC).

5x and QPQ done. I like ALT 1 for which the hook is verified. Where does it say Roosevelt stayed there during his tenure as president (in the reference for the original hook)? Some issues with phrasing in the article too. Ashwin147 (talk) 16:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

It says "Condado Vanderbilt Hotel was built on Ashford Avenue in 1919 by Frederick William Vanderbilt (son of William Henry Vanderbilt) and welcomed Hollywood stars and important dignitaries over the years like Charles Lindberg and President Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt." in Reference 4. Which issues with phrasing? Thanks for the review. — Diva Knockouts 16:40, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The Presidential reference was based on a question I have (and I could be entirely wrong here as a non US citizen)- aren't all Presidents called Presidents in retrospective writing? By which I mean to say even if Roosevelt had been say a senator when he stayed at the hotel and became Potus later, a write-up written after both events could say President Roosevelt stayed at the CVH. Hence my question about an explicit mention. The ALT however leaves no scope for any such doubt wrt its hook. As for phrasing, consider this:"Building of the establishment began in 1917 by Frederick William Vanderbilt, the son of William Henry Vanderbilt, located on Ashford Avenue. On 16 October 1919, the hotel was inaugurated after a cost of one million dollars being spent." Building of the establishment began = simply, construction began/ was begun by. And what is located on Ashford Avenue - son or the hotel? Or "after a cost of one million dollars being spent" = having cost a million dollars. The text on the whole needs tightening for these little things that jar. It is otherwise a good read. Ashwin147 (talk) 18:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I was assuming that was what they meant, while he was in office. As I can not find an explicit mention that confirms this, I guess you're right. Now, with the wording, I believe I have addressed the issues after rewording some sentences as English is not my first language. — Diva Knockouts 18:50, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

DivaKnockouts, I've edited the article, chopping out excess detail and what sounded like promo fare and have corrected some of the grammar. Now, we'll need a new reviewer to just go through this and give a final go ahead or otherwise.Ashwin147 (talk) 20:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Ashwin. New review needed. — Diva Knockouts 21:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Everything looks good to me except some of the content of "Renovation" section sounds like an advertisement. Most of it is not encyclopedic. See if you can change it. - Vivvt (Talk) 19:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

If the "Renovation" contents sounds, in part, like an advertisement, then this is not ready to be approved: it appears that some "promo fare" still remains. When the issue is more fully addressed, then the article can be considered for DYK. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:17, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Just wanted to check if its ok if I modify the content. Will it require another reviewer in that case? - Vivvt (Talk) 21:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. It's definitely okay for you to modify the content. However, it would probably be a good idea to have someone else look to see whether they consider the changes enough to remove the promotional and non-encyclopedic components. It's harder to see if it still exists once you've worked on it yourself. BlueMoonset (talk) 06:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Advertisement problem in Renovations-section has still not been dealt with.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 12:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

If Amberrock can re-review the hook, I can clean up the article. - Vivvt (Talk) 13:23, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Sure. Drop me (here or on my talk page) a line when you're done.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 13:52, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I have made some changes. Let me know if anything else is required. - Vivvt (Talk) 14:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that Vivvt! — Diva Knockouts 15:15, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Better, warmer, closer.. but the part about how many rooms are where still feels too much like an ad.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 16:10, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Corrected. I had some doubts about that particular sentence but then you may never know somebody might have found that "encyclopedic". ;) - Vivvt (Talk) 17:29, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Here's your {{DYKtick}}.—♦♦ AMBER^(ЯʘCK) 17:41, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your review, Ambder. @DivaKnockouts: Enjoy. - Vivvt (Talk) 17:46, 19 April 2013 (UTC)