Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Art Deco architecture of New York City/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 Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 5 September 2023 [1].

Art Deco architecture of New York City[edit]

Nominator(s): Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Art Deco got its start in Europe, but perhaps nowhere did the architectural style make as big an impact as in New York City, where it came to define some of the greatest skyscrapers of the city, as well as numerous smaller structures across the city. Article has had a thorough GAN by Premeditated Chaos and smaller contributions by others, and I think it's pretty close to FA quality. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:02, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

  • File:Art_Deco_architecture_of_New_York_City_collage.jpg needs copyright info for the 2D artworks included
  • File:Drawing,_Study_for_Maximum_Mass_Permitted_by_the_1916_New_York_Zoning_Law,_Stage_4,_1922_(CH_18468717).jpg: where was this first published and what is the author's date of death?
  • File:Queens_Boulevard,_New_York_City_(1920).jpg: source link is dead. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:29, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hey Nikkimaria, I've fleshed out the image descriptions of the Queens Boulevard pic and the Ferriss drawing. Ferriss died in 1962, but I think the relevant matter for the image is it was created in 1922 and promulgated to some degree; I've never seen a source saying exactly how it was published, but it must have been mass-market since it was pretty influential (so presumably at least an architectural digest/journal or the like.) Otherwise, it was published in 1929, and I haven't seen a government copyright license for a renewal, so either way it's PD-US at this point. As for the collage, do you mean copyright info for the mural that's part of File:Large mural.jpg? I would think that would be permissible per de minimis usage, but if you think it's too major a component of the collage I can swap. It's a WPA mural so the ownership is with the US government, but I don't know if James Brooks was technically an employee (and I've never seen a clear explanation about the copyright status of WPA works versus the usual PD-government employee clearances we have.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 20:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • For the collage, it'd be both that and what's in the top right - I think both fall above the de minimis bar. On Ferris, the image has still got a life+70 tag - if he didn't die until 1962 we can't use that. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:20, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from PMC[edit]

I reviewed this at GA under the assumption it would be going to FA at some point. I was satisfied with the result from the GAN - the article gives a thorough overview without getting bogged down in any details, and is well-written and well-sourced. Delighted to see it here at FAC, and it's an easy support. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:37, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from HAL[edit]

I absolutely adore Art Deco, so I'm staking a plot here. ~ HAL333 17:25, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey HAL333, just checking in. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:07, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
HAL333, nudge :) . Gog the Mild (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I went AWOL — here's all I got:

  • Is "middle class" usually hyphenated?
    • In the noun usage in the article versus middle-class adjective, I don't believe so.
  • "laws that would impact Art Deco architecture" --> "laws that impacted Art Deco architecture" per WP:WOULDCHUCK
    • Done.
  • "While the United States would not"
  • Unless required by the rules of English grammar, I would purge all uses of "would" in the article. There's 20 or so.
    • I've removed it save for one quotation and three other cases where we're in the past talking chronologically about future events; I think it works better because those are cases talking about Art Deco before it was a formed architectural movement.
  • Is "expo" encyclopedic?
    • Wrote it out completely.
  • I might abbreviate "United States" after its first usage. With that, I might change "as the United States's entry into World War I" to "American entry".
    • Done.
  • Should "Classical" be capitalized?
    • Capitalized it one place it appears, left it lower case for one spot where it's talking about modern versus classical forms in general, rather than Classical architecture specifically.
  • "It was eventually restored" -- what year?
    • There's not a specific timeframe in the article, but I added the decade.
  • "historic landmarks of the city" --> "historic city landmarks"
    • Done.
  • On a side note, that image of the el train in Queens is mindblowing.
    • Yeah, it's one of my favorite photos. There's a couple even earlier that are surprisingly even more rural. It's really a train to nowhere.

In the final analysis, it looks very good — definitely featured quality. ~ HAL333 21:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks HAL333 for the review. I responded inline. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Happy to support. ~ HAL333 18:45, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment[edit]

More than three weeks in and just the single general support. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:23, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Epicgenius[edit]

PMC alerted me to this off-wiki. I hope to have some comments up soon, but ping me if I forget. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:37, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just to start off, in the "Landmarked buildings" section, I'd suggest noting that this may not be a complete list of buildings, but rather a list of the most notable ones. There are other buildings mentioned in Robins's book and the LPC website that aren't mentioned in this table, like the Fuller Building, but I completely understand if this is intended to be a sampling of notable landmarked buildings. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:41, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Epicgenius I've tweaked the wording, does that work better for you? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:10, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that looks fine to me. I'll be away from the computer today, but I can look at this article in more depth tomorrow. Epicgenius (talk) 18:31, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Epicgenius, any more to come on this? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:08, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I will come back to this tomorrow, but I'm not finding much to critique on a quick glance. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:10, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Epicgenius ? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Over the past week, I've gone through the article and modified some of the captions myself. However, I did not really find much to critique besides prose. I will leave these comments tomorrow. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lead:
  • I suggest adding slightly more detail about Art Deco elements to the lead. Currently, the lead feels a bit short relative to how detailed the rest of the article is.
Background:
  • "German expressionism" links to German expressionist cinema. Is this the right link?
  • "Builders demolished twice as many buildings as went up, with the new buildings occupying multiple old lots." - The first part of this sentence sounds strange to me, as it sounds like the builders went up. I'd say "Twice as many buildings were demolished as went up" or something similar. For the second part of the sentence, I would clarify that builders could construct larger edifices on larger lots; otherwise, it would be unclear why the next sentence mentions that the amount of office space increased by 92%.
  • "Once a building rose up and set back to cover 25 percent of the lot, clients and architects were not constrained by height." - I would reword this to clarify that a building could rise without restriction as long as it covered no more than 25 percent of the lot.
  • "The ironwork was provided" - Optionally, you may want to clarify that it's the ironwork on the Madison Belmont Building's lower stories
  • "One of the first "true" Art Deco skyscrapers" - True according to whom?
More in a bit. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Epicgenius tweaked the above. German expressionism does indeed refer to the style of the films (I suppose you could have a separate article on it beyond the media, but that's really its enduring influence beyond general expressionism.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 20:03, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. I'll check the other sections tomorrow, but this looks to be in pretty good shape so far. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:06, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Vacant0[edit]

Incoming. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Missing pages: Ref 1c, Ref 13, Ref 27 (both instances).
  • Mind adding Al Smith's political occupation, like how you did for architects, historians, and financiers in the article.
  • The New York Times and Roaring Twenties could be wikilinked in the Commercial section.

Besides this, and what HAL333 said yesterday, I'd say that the article meets the FA criteria. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • Vacant0: thanks for the check, and for catching those refs missing source information. Added page numbers and a chapter for the Knowles book (I've only got the ebook version so unfortunately can't give a closer source than the relevant chapter. Would you want me to add quotes as well? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:04, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      A quote for Ref 27 would be good then. I've also found another one but forgot to add it to the list, Ref 12a is also missing a page. Vacant0 (talk) 18:27, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • It seems like this has been addressed so I'll change my vote towards support. It is always interesting to learn something new about Art Deco. --Vacant0 (talk) 21:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review from MyCatIsAChonk[edit]

No spotcheck necessary, so I'll focus on formatting and reliability. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:19, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • All citations must use the same casing (title case or sentence case) per MOS:CONFORMTITLE
  • The publishers/names of works seem to be linked randomly; in my opinion, I think it's better to either link all or link none, but I've seen some editors just link the first instance of a publisher/work.
  • Why do only some of the NYT sources have ISSN numbers, but others don't? I'd exclude ISSNs because otherwise you'd need to add them to every single site (at least, every site that has ISSNs)
  • Only some of the books have OCLCs. Either exclude OCLCs from all or keep OCLCs for all.
  • All the ISBN numbers should use proper hyphenation. This tool is good for easily converting them into proper hyphenation.
  • Some of the books have locations of publication but some don't. For consistency, either all should have them or none should.
  • Refs 18, 21 needs "registration" in access parameter
  • Ref 23 needs full date and author (if there is one)
  • Refs 23, 25 need "subscription" in the access parameter, since they're from the subscription-only TimesMachine
  • Make ref 29 all lowercase per MOS:ALLCAPS
  • Ref 39 (6sqft 2018): what makes 6sqft reliable?
  • Refs 41 and 42 are dead
  • Ref 45: The NPS should be the publisher, not the name of work, and spell out the name in full: National Park Service
  • Ref 52: the author isn't what's listed on the website
  • Refs 67 and 73: remove "US" from publisher; just "National Park Service" is correct
  • Put "none" in the ref parameter of the "Further reading" sources

David Fuchs, that's all from me, nice work on keeping consist formatting for the NYCL sources. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 14:19, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey MyCatIsAChonk, thanks for the look. I believe I've addressed all the above; adjusted citations so they should all be title case, removed OCLCs/ISSNs, hyphenated the ISBNs, added access parameters, fixed the archives on dead refs, etc. I swapped out Ref 39 (6sqft) and just used a NYT piece instead. Only thing I don't think I could address is the author for Ref 23 without a date and author; added the date but the original NYT story ran without a byline. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 20:01, 22 August 2023 (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/Art_Deco_architecture_of_New_York_City/archive1&oldid=1173958207"