Talk:Marshall Field and Company Building

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Marshall Field and Company Building has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Architecture (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject National Register of Historic Places (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Chicago (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Illinois (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Skyscrapers (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Retailing (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Retailing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of retailing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 

Tree[edit]

"The Walnut room hosts an annual 3-story christmas tree." It's not on the photo; why the photo?--andreasegde (talk) 05:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ralph J. Christian source, and photos[edit]

I just added a link to the Ralph J. Christian-authored official NRHP Inventory/Nomination PDF document, with photos, for the building. It seems to have some info that could usefully be added to the article, such as cost being $1,750,000 to construct the 1902 part, and the 1907 version having 35 acres of floor area (both facts appearing on "item 7 page one"). It is itself a comprehensive source, and some of its bibliographical references, such as the Palmer and the Twyman ones might possibly also be useful to consult. Hope this helps. doncram (talk) 02:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Either of the first 2 photos in the NRHP photo set would add nicely to the article. They provide a perspective view on the whole exterior, probably from an angle not available to take a photo today. However, the photo credit is given to Marshall Field & Company store, so I believe they are not in the public domain and permission from the store would have to be obtained to release them under GFDL or similar, for use in this article. I wondered if there were HABS pics of the same perspective, but it seems there are not. doncram (talk) 02:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Assuming the vantage point is no longer available, I think a lower-resolution version of one of those pics could be used under a fair use argument, similar to the vantage point argument used to support fair use of Commons "Image:StPaulsChapel3.jpg". doncram (talk) 02:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Marshall Field River Warehouse[edit]

The Marshall Field River Warehouse, at 310 West Polk Street, Chicago, Cook County, IL, is covered by HABS (HABS search here), although the flagship store does not seem to be. I think this must be the H. H. Richardson designed warehouse described in the NRHP Inventory/Nomination document. Perhaps it would be useful to create at least a stub article on the warehouse too, and relate to it by at least a "See also" link from this article on the flagship store. doncram (talk) 02:29, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay this river warehouse is not Marshall Field's Wholesale Store, the one designed by H. H. Richardson. It still could be useful to create an article on it, and relate both/either of them to this article on the flagship store, which they presumably supplied. doncram (talk) 03:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

1. The lead is too long for an article of this small.

2. This article is in no way able to cover criteria 3a of the Good Article criteria. There's a section covering the building of it, but then that's it. The next date mentioned is 2006. 100 years passed, and not a single mention of anything that happened in it?

3. "Christmas traditions" and "Popular culture" are much too short.

I'm putting this on hold, because I like to give the editors some time to respond, but this has a ton of work to be done on it before it can reach GA status. Noble Story (talk) 07:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Lead[edit]

"The building is the second largest store in the world.The building was declared a National Historic Landmark and listed on the National Register of Historic Places on June 2, 1978. It was designated a Chicago Landmark on November 1, 2005."

These sentences are rather choppy. Try combining them to improve the flow.Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 05:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"The building is known, among other things, for its atria, for having been built in stages over the course of more than two decades, for its outdoor clocks and for its Tiffany & Co. mosaic ceiling."

Reference? And use a conjunction to connect the two clauses.

rearranged and referenced.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 05:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Building details[edit]

"Potter Palmer convinced Marshall Field and Levi Leiter to move the Field, Leiter & Co. store to State Street at the corner of Washington Street in 1868."

Who are all of these men? You should say who they are.

It should now be clear that Palmer started the business, these gentlemen became his partners and then took over the business.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"After being consumed by the Great Chicago Fire and splitting the wholesale business from the retail operations, the store resumed operations at State and Market in a building leased from the Singer Sewing Machine Company. This building was consumed in a fire in 1877. In 1879 a new Singer Building was built, and Field purchased it. The business has remained there since and has expanded."

I'm sorry, but I'm a bit confused as to what this has to do with the building. What made the company buy the building? The above doesn't really make that clear.

I think I have said about as much as is appropriate in this article. See the main link at the top for further detail or some of the refs in that paragraph.

"The 12-story granite building was built in stages between 1892 and 1914. The building is built on a six partition block with sections that were added to the building in 1902, 1906, 1907, and 1914. The two primary sections along State Street (The north building built in 1902 and the south in 1907) were designed by Charles B. Atwood (before his death) at D. H. Burnham & Company. The building has several atria: A Tiffany & Co. mosaic dome caps 5-story atrium in the southwest corner; the northwest section has a 13-story skylit atrium, and a newer atrium with a fountain in the center is bridged by double escalator banks. The Tiffany Dome was the first iridescent glass dome and it is the largest glass mosaic of its kind. Only Egypt's 3,000-year-old Temple of Karnak, with its 70-foot (21 m) columns rivals the four 50-foot (15 m) Ionic granite columns on the State Street façade."

Keep the tense consistent (as in always in the past or present).

This is a difficult instruction to follow. I made some tense mistakes which I am correcting, but the building was built . . . and the features of the building are. . .--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 05:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I have split the paragraphs into a past tense one and a present tense paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 05:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
In all honesty, it seems like "The Tiffany Dome is the first iridescent glass dome" is now wrong, but I am not sure.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 05:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"On September 9, 2006, at the time of the store conversion, the name of the building was officially changed to "Macy's at State Street."

What was the "store conversion"? Clarify.

Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"The original department store was founded and built by Marshall Field."

Isn't this already stated?

I have rephrased this statement to be a more clear summary.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Business History[edit]

"The store housed a legendary business."

That's a rather abrupt introduction. And, it seems like a POV statement.

revised to be less POV.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"From a business perspective the building was the site of several business firsts."

That seems rather obvious. Could be deleted.

Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"The building has several Christmas traditions. It is known as the former production cite of Frango and for the Walnut Room christmas tree. It also hosts an ornate window display at the street level. Annually a three-story tall christmas tree is brought in for the holiday season. With all the opposition to the conversion, Macy's made a formal statement of their intent to continue the traditions of a 45-foot (13.716 m) christmas tree, a seventh floor Frango viewing kitchen, and animated holiday window displays."

Capitalize Christmas all the time.

Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 08:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"The building is known for its clocks, which weigh about 7.5 short tons (6.7 LT) each, on its northwest and southwest corners along State Street at both Randolph and Washington. The southwest clock, known as the Great Clock, was installed on November 26, 1897. Marshall Field envisioned the clock as a beacon for his store which he viewed as a meeting place. On November 3, 1945, Norman Rockwell drew a picture of one of the Marshall Field Building clocks on the cover of the Saturday Evening Post. The clock was installed after the southwest corner of the store had became a popular meeting place and people began leaving notes for one another on the Field's windows. The clock was an attempt end this practice, and encourage punctuality. The Rockwell painting shows a man perched atop a ladder and adjusting one of the Marshall Field's clock to correspond with his own pocket watch. The Oriental Theatre in the background proves this depicts the matching Great Clock at the northwest corner of State & Randolph. Rockwell donated the original painting, The Clock Mender, to the store where it hung on the seventh floor in 1948. After Target Co. sold Field's to Federated Department Stores in 2005, the Federated discovered a reproduction on display. Federated removed the fake and asked Target to return the original. The painting has been donated to the Chicago Historical Society."

Move the Rockwell painting information to be together. Also, maybe you should split up the paragraph, as it's rather long. Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 08:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"In John Dos Passos' novel The 42nd Parallel (1930), character Eric Egstrom is employed at this building."

This information seems rather trivial. It could be deleted.

Now that we have moved all the non popular culture stuff about the clock out of this section, we need some other stuff and this is the best of what we have now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 08:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

General[edit]

Maybe this is just my preference, but I think that the images could be better placed. The way they are placed makes the column of text rather narrow. For such a short article, you may even want to consider using only one or two images. In particular, try moving the picture in the lead to somewhere else. It really throws the page out of wack.

Noble Story (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Is this still an issue given all the editorial changes?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 08:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Lead[edit]

"Its ornamentation includes for a pair of well-known outdoor clocks, which serve as symbols of the store, and for its Tiffany & Co. mosaic ceiling."

Eliminate the "for" after ""includes". And "for its Tiffany & Co. mosaic ceiling" doesn't mean anything really. Make the meaning of it clear.

I am glad one of us is alert.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Business History[edit]

"Although the official corporate name of the retail entity based in this building had been Marshall Field & Company (nicknamed Marshall Field's) from 1881 until 2006 the store has had five different names since its inception in 1852 as P. Palmer & Co."

Put a comma after "2006".Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"Potter Palmer convinced Marshall Field and Levi Leiter to move the Field, Leiter & Co. store to State Street at the corner of Washington Street in a building Palmer owned in 1868 after bowing out of involvment in day to day operations with his new partners of Field, Palmer & Leiter."

I think some added commas and punctuation would help avoid confusion. Maybe after "owned" and after "1868".

Reworded.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"This building was consumed in another fire in 1877. In 1879, a new Singer Building was built, and Field purchased it."

Maybe you can combine these sentences.Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"The business has remained there since and has expanded. In fact, four subsequent buildings were added to it to form the integrated structure that we now call the Marshall Field and Company Building."

To say "and has expanded" is rather awkward. Maybe you can just delete it, and then combine the two sentences. Also, say "that is now called...", not "that we now call...".Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"However, Chicago evolved and by the 1920s, commuter suburbs began to have significant retail districts."

I think you can maybe just drop the "Chicago evolved" part (rather obvious), and maybe combine this with the next sentence.Green tickY--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 13:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Business legend[edit]

"The building hosts the first escalators in a department store and continues to be the second largest store in the world."

Change the first verb to past tense.

How is that?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

"Marshall Field took over the operations of the store in 1881 and became the first merchant post the price of the goods in plain sight, which the common practice of haggling and charging whatever the buyer would pay."

Say "to post". Also, I don't really know what you mean by "which the common practice of haggling and charging whatever the buyer would pay".

Honestly, my native tongue is English. I was getting tired.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Traditions and popular culture[edit]

"Rockwell donated the original painting, The Clock Mender, to the store where it hung on the seventh floor in 1948."

Put a comma after "store". Also, maybe move the date nearer to the original clause to avoid confusion.

Also, as I said, I don't think it's a good idea to have a second image in the lead (besides the one in the userbox). Noble Story (talk) 10:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

This image is necessary
  1. It is very soothing to Chicagoans to see with the new caption.
  2. Even at 1024 x 768 the squeezing is not so bad with this smaller image in the lead.
  3. It is necessary for formatting because otherwise the lead is to short and the infobox extends into the main body paragraphs extensively.
  4. I am trying to work a lot of good images into the body of the article to keep the gallery size down.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:16, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

Review of Marshall Field and Company Building

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

After making the necessary changes, and finishing it off with a few minor edits of my own, this article is now a GA. Noble Story (talk) 12:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)