Template:Did you know nominations/Eddie's House

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Eddie's House[edit]

(
)
  • Comment: This might be one to save for April Fools if reviewers think it would work better for that.

Created/expanded by Found5dollar (talk). Self nom at 05:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

*Reviewed: Super Hornio Brothers at April Fools DYK
Didnt review it fully yet. Either i am not well or this article definitely needs simplification. Opening sentence...complicated. Who are these Bergers? If you know, please add that. Who are these Jim and Eric Berger "who rebuilt the Eddie's house" in the lead para? Is Robert Berger, who was to built the house, also owner of the house? Or is he another Berger? It says that "In 1973 Eddies House was discarded." Discarded as in demolished, stopped to put to use? And you dont need to use Mr. Frank Llyod Wright's full name everytime. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 16:14, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
I have gone in and reworked the Lead some. I would assume that Robert is the owner of the house as he is the father in this story, but I can not find anything saying explicitly who owned it. I know that Robert built it and lived in it, but can only assume that he owned it.--Found5dollar (talk) 14:07, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay! The lead looks okay now. Few more fixes required. The ref 1 of Architizer cant be used. Its a blog. 2 other refs of Huffington Post & Mercury News are good and probably sufficient too. So please replace that. The hook in itself is otherwise well referenced. As to your phrasing of the hook i am not sure. I dont mind it for April Fool's day. But would request some other editor to go through it. I am also not sure about it as the article of Wright itself doesnt say anything about the usual leakings in his architecture which are talked about in these sources. Also we dont know that this was his "best effort". Maybe he designed something that leaks just to ditch this kid Jim who would keep writing letters to him. Who knows?! -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 19:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Ok replying to your issues...Architizer's blog is a carefully curated architectural news blog with postings from architecture reporters and reviewers, and it is not true to say that "all blogs are not reliable sources." In my understanding of Wikipedia:Reliable_source_examples#Are_weblogs_reliable_sources.3F a blog like this would be considered reliable in this instance. I have added two references to Frank Lloyd Wrights leaky roof problem. to solve the "best effort problem howabout an alt like:

ALT1... that much like many of his other buildings, Frank Lloyd Wright designed a dog house with a leaky roof?--Found5dollar (talk) 03:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Okay! Dont wanna go in those details of blog or what for sake of this DYK. Later even if the blog reference is removed i am sure all things that depend on it are covered by other two references of HP & MN. They almost have the full story covered. Your new references to leaky business are good and sufficient. I would also approve the Alt1 you suggested. But just as you wanted it to be for Fool's day how about this Alt2, combining both? Will leave it for the one who picks it.

ALT2 ... that much like many of his other buildings, Frank Lloyd Wright couldn't even design a dog house that didn't leak? --Animeshkulkarni (talk) 09:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I like ALT2, and i am fine with saving it for fools day, but I'll leave that chouce up to reviewers, or the people that make the queues.--Found5dollar (talk) 13:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
  • In that case it should probably be moved to the page. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm all for that... am i allowed ot more the page or does a reviewer have to?--Found5dollar (talk) 15:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Here's a version that I reworded for grammar, clarity, and accuracy:
  • ALT3 ... that, as with most of his building designs, even Frank Lloyd Wright's design for a dog house has leaks? --Orlady (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Most of? Where is the evidence that more than 50% of his designs had this problem? Even the "many of" in ALT2 seems something of an overstatement of the case: how many buildings is this acknowledged to be an issue with, out of how many that he designed? Kevin McE (talk) 22:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Currently used refs in the article do point out that the leaking has been noticed in various cases. Confronting a legacy of a leaky roof, Wright House, Wrong Roof. Also this ref quotes Michael Miner, "What is more appropriate or authentic for a Frank Lloyd Wright building than for it to leak? If it didn't leak, no one would believe it was by Frank Lloyd Wright. It's the perfect ending to the story." Miner made a documentary on Wright. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 13:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
I see that there have been such issues with his designs, but the proposal says most: we can only state that if we can verify that we are talking about >50%. Many is obviously less precise, but is there any reasonable estimate of what %age of his buildings it is an issue with. Kevin McE (talk) 23:30, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Ref 4 explicity states that "Frank Lloyd Wright's legacy includes famously leaky roofs." and Frank Lloyd Wright has a "legacy of a leaky roof." If you are so caught up on the word "many" how about one of these two this
ALT4 ... that much like several of his other buildings, Frank Lloyd Wright couldn't even design a dog house that didn't leak?
ALT5 ... that Frank Lloyd Wright couldn't even design a dog house that didn't leak?--Found5dollar (talk) 01:57, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
OK. It is simply that most suggests a particular metric, and many is too vague a metric. Not sure that I particularly like couldn't, but that's probably a matter of taste rather than propriety.
ALT6 ... that Frank Lloyd Wright's recurring problem with leaky roofs even affected his dog house? Kevin McE (talk) 07:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
That alt zaps all the funny right out of the the fact that Frank Lloyd wright designed a dog house with a leaky roof. Also the dog house wasn't "his," he just designed it while the Bergers built and owned it.--Found5dollar (talk) 13:04, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Christopher Wren didn't own St Paul's Cathedral: it is still describable as his. The possessive is frequently used to link designers to their designs.[1] Kevin McE (talk) 19:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
* ALT7 ... that Frank Lloyd Wright designed a dog house -- and its roof leaks? --Orlady (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Small addition to ALT7
ALT8... that Frank Lloyd Wright designed a dog house -- and even its roof leaks? -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 14:55, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Eddie%27s_House&oldid=1189657976"