Talk:55 Central Park West

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cooperatives (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cooperatives, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cooperatives 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-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 B-class, Low-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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject New York City (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Former good article nominee 55 Central Park West was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for 55 Central Park West:
  • The link to the National Register Information System doesn't take me to anything related to 55 Central Park West. It should ideally be a direct link.
  • Citations should be placed per WP:CITE.
  • The lead states the building has "... unique architectural features ..." but this doesn't seem to be expanded upon in the main article. "...apart from most others..." doesn't make it unique.
  • "The exterior of the building is also somewhat non-traditional." but then it states color was being used widely in the 1920s. What would have been traditional?
  • I do think the Architecture section could be expanded somewhat, but that's a personal opinion
  • As the brick facade rises from the ground it changes shade from a deep purple to a yellow-white. Color was being widely used during the 1920s as a tool in architeture for overall effects.

These sentences seemed to cause some confusion but I think to much is being read into the second sentence. It does say color was widely used but doesn't say anything about shading, I think that's where the "non-traditional" comes from. Either way, unless we have another source we can't really say much more. I don't have any books on skyscraper architecture, only houses. I can see what they say about Art Deco and use of color though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Judgesurreal777 (talkcontribs) 21:33, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Priority 6

Funny[edit]

I never thought about this until now, and it's probably wholly inappropriate for a talk page, but I am not trying to impress anyone, so here goes:

In this case, 55 Central Park West was created by IvoShandor.'

Food for thought. IvoShandor 13:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

"Ghostbusters Building"! How encyclopedic! Say, let's change The Dakota to Rosemary's Baby Apartments.--Wetman 03:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Good plan, produce the reliable source, like I have for this article. I don't give a shit what it's called. IvoShandor 06:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Your "reliable source" is anecdotal at best. Especially since the name is neither in quotes nor capitalized in the original article. I do not think that the name of this article is proper. --Chancemichaels 20:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
I think NY Magazine passes the test at WP:RS, as I said the only other name is the address that I can find. But smart ass comments like Wetman's above warrant smart ass responses. IvoShandor 02:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

GA review comments[edit]

Hello, here are my comments:

  • The link to the National Register Information System doesn't take me to anything related to 55 Central Park West. It should ideally be a direct link.
  • Minor point but why isn't this article correctly piped in the Ghostbusters template?
  • Citations should be placed per WP:CITE.
  • "...whom they were working for." - "...for whom they were working." reads better.
  • Wikilink Upper West Side for context.
  • "New York city" or "New York City"?
  • "considered to be mostly "second tier"...." cite this directly as it's a quote.
  • "One of the building's earliest notable resident was musician Rudy Vallee, whose salary of up to $20,000 per week afforded him posh surroundings." - needs citation, and "posh" isn't particularly encyclopaedic.
  • The lead states the building has "... unique architectural features ..." but this doesn't seem to be expanded upon in the main article. "...apart from most others..." doesn't make it unique.
  • The building should be referred to as 55 Central Park West in preference to the Ghostbusters Building.
  • "The exterior of the building is also somewhat non-traditional." but then it states color was being used widely in the 1920s. What would have been traditional?
  • "Shandor is said to have started his secret society, which performed rituals on the building's roof, as early as 1920.[6] The building at 55 Central Park West was not built until 1929.[2]" - flow these two sentences together.

Not too many comments - I do think the Architecture section could be expanded somewhat, but that's a personal opinion. I'll put the GA on hold for the moment. The Rambling Man 09:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Just so you guys know, I don't think you do direct links to NRIS entries within the database, they just redirect you to the main page. If you need any help or clarification just ask on my talk. IvoShandor 07:10, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
In that case, some instruction would be required in the reference to allow a non-expert (e.g. me) to get to the information required which is used as reference material in this article. The Rambling Man 07:13, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
That database is pretty easy to use, and I think I remember seeing something around here that said in situations like that it is better to just link to the database anyway.
I'm having trouble using that database (and I'm a software engineer!) - can you tell me exactly what I need to do to get the information referenced in this article please?! The Rambling Man 07:57, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, maybe it's not so easy to use. This link will take you right to the query by name but that seems to be all the further I can get in. Just type Central Park West Historic District into the search box. There are database instructions here, I will include those with the citation. I changed the link in the citation to point to the main page of the database, which makes it a bit easier to navigate. IvoShandor 08:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I tried following your instructions and got zero hits returned... Also tried just "Central Park West", still nothing. The Rambling Man 08:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, not sure what the problem is. It doesn't always work right, especially at this hour, as it seems that it is an ongoing government project. But it worked for me just a few minutes ago. It should work, did you try clicking the "Location" search link on the NRIS main page? Maybe that will work. It is also possible that the listing date is included in the National Register of Historic Places nomination form, though they aren't always, especially with the older nominations. I can tell you that the information is accurate, and I wouldn't think something as trivial as the date of its National Register listing would be something that would often be challenged anyway, I just always cite everything inline, it's easier and less ambiguous anyway. IvoShandor 08:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
No joy, perhaps cross-Atlantic queries are not so reliable! You're probably right, the date of its NR listing probably wouldn't be challenged, but I'm of the opinion that if you have a citation, it should at the very least work or be capable of working given sufficient information..! The Rambling Man 08:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

(unindent)Me too, it usually works, at least here. I mean, it is run by the United States government, so it's not really surprising it doesn't work, but like I say it usually does. I will see if I can find a backup citation, or if it's in the National Register nomination form. I think the weekly update listings only go back to the mid 1990s online but maybe the New York State Historic Preservation Office has something around their webpage. IvoShandor 08:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Another note: As the brick facade rises from the ground it changes shade from a deep purple to a yellow-white. Color was being widely used during the 1920s as a tool in architeture for overall effects.
These sentences seemed to cause some confusion but I think to much is being read into the second sentence. It does say color was widely used but doesn't say anything about shading, I think that's where the "non-traditional" comes from. Either way, unless we have another source we can't really say much more. I don't have any books on skyscraper architecture, only houses. I can see what they say about Art Deco and use of color though. IvoShandor 07:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I'm going to fail the application for the moment, there are still a number of comments outstanding from the review and I'd like to see the architecture side of things expanded. If, as asserted in the lead, the building has several unique features this should be relatively simple. Also, there are some WP:MOS issues, e.g. the citations are not all in the correct places - this can be solved easily. Hopefully the modifications can be made swiftly and the article can be renominated. Let me know if I can be of any further assistance. The Rambling Man 07:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for all the feedback here Rambling Man, while I didn't nominate this article, I did write it, and intended to nominate it someday. Personally, I didn't think it was ready for GA, but someone nommed it, regardless it will make there one day, rest assured. IvoShandor 08:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)