Template:Did you know nominations/New York Marriott Marquis

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 Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:54, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

New York Marriott Marquis

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

New York Marriott Marquis

• ... that while the New York Marriott Marquis hotel was valued at $579.7 million in 2008, the site was sold five years later for just $19.9 million? Source: Cardwell, Diane; Rivera, Ray (January 16, 2008). "Long Robust, Gains in New York City Property Values Start to Flatten Out". The New York Times; Clarke, Katherine (December 12, 2013). "Times Square Marriott Marquis sold in controversial $20M deal". The Real Deal New York.
  • ALT1: ... that the development of the New York Marriott Marquis hotel was so controversial, it could not be discussed at meetings of the theatrical community? Source: Kakutani, Michiko (January 24, 1982). "Portman Hotel: Broadway Is a House Divided". The New York Times
  • ALT2: ... that John C. Portman Jr.'s New York Marriott Marquis hotel, once nicknamed "Portman's Folly", later became New York City's most valuable hotel? Source: Geist, William E. (October 12, 1985). "About New York; New Broadway Hotel Gets the Once Over". The New York Times.
  • ALT3: ... that during the construction of the New York Marriott Marquis hotel in 1983, a guest booked a room for the Times Square Ball drop nearby, which he ultimately attended in 1999? Source: Barron, James (January 2, 2000). "The Year 2000: the Hyperbole; a Countdown Worth the Wait Vs. A Big Ho-hum". The New York Times.

• Reviewed: Ruby Tower

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 14:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ:
Overall: Really impressive work! Earwig's tool only flagged matches to attributed quotes and proper names. All four hooks are cited and interesting though I personally like the original and ALT1. Just awaiting QPQ. DanCherek (talk) 18:09, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek: Thanks for the review, I appreciate it. I've done a QPQ now. Epicgenius (talk) 14:38, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Good to go. DanCherek (talk) 14:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Promoting the main hook to Prep 5, with the image and "(pictured)". – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 12:54, 25 November 2021 (UTC)