Talk:Ted Weiss Federal Building/GA1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:11, 7 December 2024

GA Review

Passed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 22:35, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 16:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Civic Center NYC Aug 2022 299.jpg - Requires {{FoP-US}}, as the building was completed after 1990
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Architectural art "American Song" at Ted Weiss Federal Building, New York, New York LCCN2010720126.tif - US FOP does not cover sculpture or two-dimensional works of art. Consequently, the relief at the centre of this image is not free, making this a derivative image of a non-free work. Should be removed, nominated for deletion.
- In my view, this probably does still qualify under c:COM:FOP US because arguably it's part of the design of the building and is thus an architectural detail that falls under the freedom of panorama clause (specifically, This includes style elements such as gargoyles and pillars, which are protected only from three-dimensional reproduction (Leicester v. Warner Bros.)). However, I have replaced it with one of my images, which is free. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Architectural art "The New Ring Shout" at Ted Weiss Federal Building, New York, New York LCCN2010720136.tif - Same issue as above, but I'm not sure if this falls under the "incidental" clause at FOP US. There is also the question of whether the area is open to the public, which will affect its qualification for FOP-US
- Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Graphic art "Renewal" at Ted Weiss Federal Building, New York, New York LCCN2010720143.jpg - Same issue as above. This is definitely non-free, as the artist is still alive and this is a two-dimensional work of art. Nominated for deletion.
- Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Architectural art "American Song" at Ted Weiss Federal Building, New York, New York LCCN2010720127.tif - Same issue as above. Nominated for deletion. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Broadway - panoramio (37).jpg - Requires {{FoP-US}}, as the building was completed after 1990
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:Civic Center NYC Aug 2022 308.jpg - Requires {{FoP-US}}, as the building was completed after 1990
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not GA criteria, but given my expectation that you intend to go to FAC, ALT text would be nice
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, images look good! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:07, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prose review

Manhattan and Republican Alleys. - As it's a plural, this is no longer a proper name. I'd use a lower-case A
- Done, and I've done the same for "streets". To clarify, "Street", "Alley" etc. are still part of a proper name, but the common-noun portions of these names are lowercased when they are pluralized. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Agree. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These structures had been demolished to make way for a large municipal building that was never built. - Just the commercial buildings, or everything that was removed starting in the 1960s?
- I clarified this - it was all the Broadway/Reade Street buildings. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the commercial buildings on Duane Street remained until 1991, when they were demolished to make way for the current building. - Building ... building
- I've reworded this. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Ted Weiss Federal Building is designed in a modernized Federal style, with elements of the postmodern style. - Style ... style
- I've reworded this. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
with Deer Isle granite, pre-fabricated, panelized, cladding system - Feels like there should be an article in there.
- I've fixed this too. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At the top of the building is a curved colonnade. - Are "at the top" and "crowning" not synonyms? Might be better to phrase in a less ambiguous manner.
- I clarified this too. The colonnade is below the roof, and the penthouse is above it. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
addition, there was a 2,500-square-foot (230 m²) restaurant with an attached 2,000-square-foot (190 m²) dining terrace. - Any information as to what happened to it?
- I changed the tense, as I couldn't find any indication that it was removed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1,300 tons of air conditioning - Might need a convert template here
- This is a weird case, as the word "tons" here does not refer to short/long/metric tons, but to a ton of refrigeration, which doesn't have an entry here. Instead I manually converted this to British thermal units and used a {{convert}} template for that figure. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
closing Manhattan and Republican Alleys. - As per above
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The GSA had planned to select developers for both projects in January 1989, but it had not selected a developer for either site by that February. - Developers ... developer
- Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To expedite the construction process, the federal government proposed acquiring the land through a "friendly condemnation", in which the city would not object to its property being acquired through eminent domain. - Per WP:ASTONISH, I'd remove the easter egg friendly condemnation
- Eminent domain is already linked later in the sentence, so I just removed this link. Friendly condemnation is a subset of eminent domain in which the owner doesn't object to the eminent-domain process being used against their property. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
minority-owned firms. - Per WP:FIRSTMENTION, feels like this link should be where "minority companies" is at the beginning of the paragraph
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
U.S. representative Gus Savage, chairman of the committee that reviewed GSA projects, also pressured the GSA to halt the work. - GSA ... GSA
- Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Federal officials announced in July 1992 that they had permanently halted all work on the eastern end of the site, which would have contained the pavilion. Instead, federal officials suggested that the pavilion site be used as a museum. - pavilion ... pavilion
- Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
for a memorial to Black Americans there - You are inconsistent in using African American and Black American
- I changed this and other mentions of Black Americans to "African Americans", since that's what most of the sources say. (They don't overlap 100%, but none of the sources mention non-African Black Americans, so I changed it to "African American"). Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, very tight.

Source review

Not a GA criterion, but I'm noticing that the capitalization is inconsistent.
Please be consistent in including an ISSN for periodicals (compare New York Times and Newsweek, Architectural Record)
- I have removed them for consistency. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck (based off this revision)

Earwig does not return anything of concern
2a: Supports
23b: Supports
32c: Link is dead. Referring to archived version, supports
41b: Supports.
50: Supports
77a: Supports

Conclusion

Overall, very tight, though images need work. I'll do a spotcheck in a bit... just going to drop this here now for your review. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Spotcheck passed with flying colours. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the review @Chris Woodrich. I've addressed all the issues you mentioned above. Epicgenius (talk) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks for getting back so quickly. I'm happy to say that this article meets the GA criteria, and am happy to promote it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==GA Review==
+{{atopg
+| status =
+| result = Passed. &nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Crisco 1492|Chris Woodrich]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 19:11, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
+}}
 {{Good article tools}}
 <noinclude>{{al|{{#titleparts:Ted Weiss Federal Building/GA1|-1}}|noname=yes}}<br/></noinclude><includeonly>:''This review is [[WP:transclusion|transcluded]] from [[Talk:Ted Weiss Federal Building/GA1]]. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''</includeonly>
@@ Line 81: / Line 85: @@
 ***Thanks for the review @[[User:Crisco 1492|Chris Woodrich]]. I've addressed all the issues you mentioned above. [[User:Epicgenius|Epicgenius]] ([[User talk:Epicgenius|talk]]) 18:59, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
 ****Thanks for getting back so quickly. I'm happy to say that this article meets the GA criteria, and am happy to promote it.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Crisco 1492|Chris Woodrich]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 19:10, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
+{{abot}}

Crisco 1492 (talk | contribs)