Template:Did you know nominations/Highfields (Amwell and Hopewell, New Jersey)

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by ~ Rob^Talk 07:59, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
I've used a cropped version of the image to appear better at small sizes. ~ Rob^Talk 07:59, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Highfields (Amwell and Hopewell, New Jersey)[edit]

(

)

Highfields, the former Lindbergh estate near Hopewell, New Jersey, site of the 1932 Lindbergh kidnapping

... that after Charles and Anne Lindbergh's son was kidnapped from their home, Highfields (pictured), in the so-called "Crime of the Century," it became a juvenile rehabilitation center?

ALT1:... that the Lindbergh kidnapping, the so-called "Crime of the Century," was made possible by a warped shutter that could not be closed on the second story window of the family home, Highfields (pictured)?

Created by Djkeddie (talk). Self-nominated at 14:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC).

. New article of sufficient length. Posted by due date. No copy vio noted. Img is freely licensed. Hook references verified. But the original hook length is 238 ch and 220 ch in the ALt1 hook, with spaces. Please suggest a suitable Alt hook. If exempt from QPQ requirement, please mention it.--Nvvchar. 17:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I've edited the hooks to make them shorter. I am exempt from QPQ as this would only be my second nomination. I will keep that in mind for the future. Thanks. Djkeddie (talk) 00:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Really interesting subject with a good image that is freely licensed, but I can't find a source for the warped shutter in the references (unless I'm missing it). Would it be possible to source this specifically by this section of the text if it is going to be mentioned in the hook? Also 'crime of the century' might be better mentioned in the article (and with a reference and inverted commas) if it's going to be in the hook – I've seen the kidnapping mentioned as among the crimes of the century, but not the crime, so a source would be useful. Libby norman (talk) 11:41, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

"Crime of the Century"? Is that including genocides? I have removed that claim from both hooks as its not in the article (and is undefendable) Victuallers (talk) 17:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Just noting that the media hype at the time was beyond hyperbolic with H.L. Mencken calling it the "biggest story since the Resurrection" and too many media outlets calling it the "crime of the century". Indeed, the HBO movie from 1996 was titled Crime of the Century, so while we can recognize this as far over the top, the phrase comes from a very real place, not this author's imagination. - Dravecky (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

The reference to the warped shutter is found in the NRHP listing document, section 8, page 3, second paragraph. I certainly didn't use "Crime of the Century" because I believe that term, but because that article references this particular crime, which, as had been noted, was often described as such. Djkeddie (talk) 00:33, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I've edited the article to mentioned and cite the use of the term, Crime of the Century, and added it back in to the hooks.Djkeddie (talk) 00:41, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! we shouldn't be repeating hyperbole without making it obvious and the "so-called" and quotes do the trick. Victuallers (talk) 19:28, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Reviewer needed to finish up the review and recheck the hooks. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Length is fine, dates check out, the QPQ exemption is noted, and text appears free from close paraphrasing. Image is used in the article and properly licensed. However, while the bulk of the article is a condensed summary of the cited National Register of Historic Places documentation, reliance on this one source has left several extraordinary claims in the text apparently uncited, including one that has its own citation in the NRHP document but not in the Wikipedia article. Also, mush of the lede paragraph is uncited exposition instead of a summary of the cited text below. The lede needs to be fixed and the bulk of its current text incorporated into the body of the article and cited. The hook fact is directly cited to the NRHP document and checks out okay. The article is reasonably neutral and tone is largely acceptable but the phrase "media circus" should be reconsidered. - Dravecky (talk) 01:20, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

A lead section has been added and references adjusted. I think the use of the phrase "media circus" is factual, sourced, and highly appropriate given the historic nature of the media circus surrounding the kidnapping and the Lindberghs.Djkeddie (talk) 02:55, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Use of "media circus" is unfortunately anachronistic, since the term dates from the mid-1970s, over four decades after the events at Highfields. If you ever intend Highfields to become a Good Article, I can't imagine the term passing muster in the review there. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Structural and tone concerns have been addressed satisfactorily. My personal preference would be for more thorough sourcing but they are sufficient for the purposes of DYK. Good to go. - Dravecky (talk) 04:10, 14 August 2015 (UTC)