Talk:Grand Prospect Hall/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Mujinga (talk · contribs) 19:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Overview[edit]

Hi Rhododendrites and Epicgenius I'll take this on as part of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN Backlog Drives/January 2022. Comments to follow Mujinga (talk) 19:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Article is stable, the prose is great, I've made some comments below. There's no copyvio or original research, the article is broad and neutral. And stable. I'll put it on hold now. Mujinga (talk) 23:37, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Congrats this is now a good article Mujinga (talk) 20:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Copyvio check[edit]

  • Earwig gives nothing to worry about

Pictures[edit]

  • Pix all licensed
  • On the gallery, I'm not sure if the second fotos of the Bieves gig or the Golden Festival add much. The scaffolding is also a duplication. So I would suggest moving the front facade foto into the text and deleting the others, but happy to discuss.
    • We already have one picture from each of those events in the article, the front facade is covered by the infobox image, and we do indeed already have one of the scaffolding, so I'm inclined to remove the gallery for now. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:50, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

  • Do you need the ref on NRISref?

Lead[edit]

  • Bat mitzvah? Cool never heard of that before
  • Originally .. original .. in second paragraph
  • overall pretty good lead

Original Prospect Hall[edit]

  • "The Prospect Heights Athletic Club, a boxing club, formed at Prospect Hall shortly after it opened, in November 1892" suggest take out comma after opened
  • "boxing tournaments, weddings, yearly balls" what reference are these on?
    • Added inline cite for boxing tournament, but haven't found where weddings/balls came from yet. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:13, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Removed weddings/balls. I see them mentioned for the new Prospect Hall, but not the old one. Feel free to restore with citation. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "flooring of the hall contained a lot of flammable material" suggest take out "a lot"
  • "drawing thousands of people watching" suggest "drawing thousands of people to watch"
  • "German societies lost a large amount of property in the fire" suggest "German societies lost trophies and keepsakes in the fire" or similar, ie something more specific

Kolle ownership[edit]

  • "opened a temporary beer garden on the site of the old hall." source says next to, not on
  • "Worried it would spread to the hall" - not sure who is subject of sentence here

White Eagle ownership[edit]

  • "By then, Prospect Hall hosted occasional boxing matches.[28] The building, by then known as the Polish Community Center, was renovated in 1970.[37]" two by thens
  • "A newspaper article the following year described the United Polish Societies of South Brooklyn as an occupant, meeting one evening a month" reads odd, can you rephrase?

Halkias ownership[edit]

  • "that he had purchased Prospect Hall's original murals" suggest "that he had purchased them"
  • need to be consistent between Halkiases and Halkias'
    • Halkiases. There was one Halkias' used accidentally. Fixed now. The one that remains is part of a quote. Doesn't seem like it needs a bracketed fix, but I don't have a strong opinion. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • wikilink bar and bat mitzvahs
  • "The rock band Arcade Fire held an album release concert for about 1,500 fans there" suggest " The rock band Arcade Fire held an album release concert there for 1,500 fans"
    • Tweaked this, added the album name, and combined it with the previous sentence for readability. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sale to Rigas[edit]

  • "filed permits" suggest "had filed permits"
  • "The demolition permits were approved in November 2021, though at that time there was not a concrete timeline for it to move forward.[58]" wow so is it actually going to be demolished and is there an update?
    • Not yet. Demolition approved, but unclear when it'll happen. It's tucked behind scaffolding still, AFAIK. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:41, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Building[edit]

  • is Ulrich J. Huberty needed to be redlinked?
    • I forget which of us did that. I think it was me? Seemed like someone who designed several notable structures in NYC would likely be notable, but I haven't done much digging. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Facade[edit]

  • ok

Features[edit]

  • " The central entrance " suggest take out central becuase there's one in previous sentence
    • Hm. The previous and next sentences use all the words I'd choose from here: front, central, and main. :) Seems more important to have "central" by staircase, so changing accordingly. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Both of these levels are supported on marble columns and surround the ballroom on all sides except the front.[62][63][64] They had decorative elements such as garlands and cartouches" - had not have because the features have been demolished? we generally seem to be flipping between past/present tense in this section
    • I don't know if they've been demolished. It seems to make sense for me for design and construction to be in the past tense, and descriptions to be in present tense (until we have a source saying it's been demolished). I'm going to defer to Epicgenius on the wording/arrangement of these features, though. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 01:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I can take a look at the text tomorrow. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:51, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I've changed the tense to past tense. I believe the exterior ornamentation at least has been removed already. As for the interior, the hall is closed permanently; while the individual design features may still be extant for the moment, places like the ballroom will sadly never see activity again. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:40, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

  • excellent referencing and nice to have the clippings to read

Done, I think?[edit]

@Mujinga: Thanks for the review. I think we're basically set with the above. A few notes, but mostly done. FYI I did come across a source published in the time since we nominated the article, so added some material. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yup nearly there, and interesting new addition. Just a few points:
  • Perhaps you missed the question Do you need the ref on NRISref? in the infobox
    • Not sure about this one. Epicgenius? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I don't think this is necessary. I can replace it with the actual NPS document that shows all the listings added in 1999. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • yeah i also think it's fine as is without the ref Mujinga (talk) 20:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fine with the Ulrich J. Huberty redlink, then he should be redlinked in lead as well
    • Redlinks in the lead always feel jarring to me. I'd prefer it just in the body, but I may not have the strongest grasp of MOS requirements. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • fair enough it's not a pass/fail issue just wanted to flag it up Mujinga (talk) 20:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "See also" section should be above references
  • External links has an SNL spoof video!? But i do like the original video that's very cool. Mujinga (talk) 19:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • A very high-profile parody/homage/whatnot seems ok to me for a subject that's otherwise mainly of local/regional significance? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 19:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • thanks for the answer, well i guess they're both ok in terms of copyright having been placed on the account of the copyright holder so then we are done, cheers both Mujinga (talk) 20:28, 9 January 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grand_Prospect_Hall/GA1&oldid=1064716869"