Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harry F. Sinclair House/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 8 September 2021 [1].

Harry F. Sinclair House[edit]

Nominator(s): ♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:49, 29 July 2021 (UTC), Epicgenius[reply]

This article is about a historic, Gilded Age mansion in New York City built in the last three years of the 19th century by a seasoned New York architect. It's a pretty charming place, today housing a Ukrainian cultural nonprofit. I worked with Epicgenius in June 2020 to get this to GA for meta:Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month, and we've decided to at last proceed to FAC. ♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:49, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review[edit]

Painting is not in public domain according to Met Museum. In US painting copyright can be complicated as they are often unpublished works. Other image copyright looks OK. (t · c) buidhe 05:39, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    • @Buidhe: At 70 PMA, for unpublished works, the painting's copyright would have expired in 1994. It could be in the 25 year minimum window for unpublished works, but that seems unlikely because the painting was gifted to the met in 1917 and first shown in 1918. It is possible that this is a Uruguay Round Agreements Act case, but France is 70 PMA and the author isn't a Mort pour la France case. I think it is safe to assume the painting is in the public domain. --In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 14:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • First of all, public display of artwork does not count as publication, at least under US law. Given that we don't know the first publication date and the Met believes that there are rights issues I think we would need conclusive evidence of public domain status. (t · c) buidhe 16:31, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Even if it has never been published, the copyright would have expired, under both French and American copyright law, 70 years after Raffaëlli's death (1994). The met restriction is probably French moral rights and not copyright. --In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 14:33, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Buidhe, is this good now? Gog the Mild (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Lee Vilenski[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

Lede
Prose
  • In 1897,[1] - what exactly are you citing here? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • This source is specifically used to cite the date. Epicgenius (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 78th and 79th Streets. - why is one linked and one not? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • 78th Street does not have an article at the moment. It may make sense to link it, though, in case it becomes notable enough for an article in the future. Epicgenius (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • But neither does 79. If we link one, then we link both, or neither. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:16, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        79th Street (Manhattan) does have a page, but I see what the problem is now. "79th Street" was already linked above, hence why it wasn't linked in that sentence. Apparently, so was Fifth Avenue, so I've removed that duplicate link. Epicgenius (talk) 22:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a bit confused. Cook owned a lot, and was purchased by Fletcher. So To design his "Cook block" abode,[5] Fletcher hired architect C. P. H. Gilbert,[7][8][a] and so impressed Fletcher that he commissioned a painting of the finished residence from Jean-François Raffaëlli in 1899. - what does Cook block mean, and what does the painting mean? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've split these - they are two different ideas. The house was built on the block owned by Cook, which was called the "Cook block". The painting was commissioned after the house was completed. Epicgenius (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • He bequeathed the property and his art collection - is the art collection important? It's the first we mention it. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Met - informal. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Augustus Jr. and Anne van Horne Stuyvesant - Is it Augustus Jr. Stuyvesant? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anne died there - I'd assume this is Anne van Horne as a first name. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • described this work as "just a Band-Aid", as the building was in a poor state - I feel like this could be explained better without the quote. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Removed and clarified what exactly this means. Epicgenius (talk) 13:17, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • New York Times, lot and wrought iron are duplinks Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colonnette - is this a mispelling? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A couple cases of unneccesary redirects, such as [[Belt course]]s Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I removed redirects where they were unnecessary, but generally I didn't do the other ones per WP:NOTBROKEN. Epicgenius (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't feel like the images have a commentary. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Lee Vilenski: I forgot to ask what you meant by that. Epicgenius (talk) 15:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Like "Dining hall, on the second floor" - I get that the caption says what the image is, but doesn't really say anything about why we have the image, or anything about what's in the image. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • ecclesiastical - not really a common word. I'd never heard of it. Maybe a more common term? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is architecture-speak, though fairly common. "Ecclesiastical" is "church", especially with Gothic architecture. I've added a link to clarify this. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 14:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we remove the 25em from the reflist and let the browser do the work? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:47, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note[edit]

Three weeks in and despite attracting some attention, the nomination has no supports and little sign of a consensus to promote forming. Unless this changes over the next two or three days I am afraid this is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:26, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Eddie891[edit]

  • Not seeing it cited that the house is also known as the Isaac D. Fletcher House
    • Couldn't find it in the NRHP doc, which I had thought used that as another name for the house. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 01:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we know how much the Met sold the house for? Also it's surprising to me that the museum was allowed to turn around and resell the house-- do we have any idea what Fletcher's will said, if anything, when bequeathing?
  • Can you be more specific about when the Met sold the house?
  • would "was in residence" be more concisely said as "lived at"?
  • "died within its walls; Anne died there in 1938, as did" "died" is repeated twice-- can this be avoided? perhaps simply as "quietly in the mansion; Anne died there..."
  • "n his final years, Augustus Jr., his butler, and his footman were the only occupants of the house." would there have been many more previously?
  • "several other mansions on Fifth Avenue were being demolished" any that could be linked?
    • Epic will have to check this, I can't inspect the ProQuest reference used. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • " it was added to the National Register of Historic Places." Since you've just named and linked, I think this could probably just be "to the register" or maybe combined with the previous sentence
    • I disagree, as the NRHP was named and linked in the lead, not the body. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link "matched grant" to Matching fund?
  • any idea why the design would have been mis-attributed?
    • No idea why it was first attributed to Stanford White. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:20, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link foreman maybe?
  • " A small number of mansions, such as that of Frank Winfield Woolworth at Fifth Avenue and 80th Street, also had narrow frontages along Fifth Avenue." is that really relevant here?
  • can the concrete supports be explained a little further or linked?
  • Has the interior always been the same layout (always 27 rooms)-- also is it 27 rooms per floor or total? Some of us have no concept of how big a mansion is
    • 27 rooms across six floors. There's a vague changelog in the final paragraph courtesy of Kathreens but as I recall she doesn't name dates for plan changes. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the carved dragon fish in the railings and those figures in funny hats holding up the windows" these are presumably the seahorses and ? Might be worth stating
    • I am unable to discern what you mean here. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:02, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • "What are 'the carved dragon fish in the railings and those figures in funny hats holding up the windows' referring to?" is what I think Eddie is saying. The "carved dragon fish" are probably the seahorses, but "what are the 'figures in funny hats'?" is what I believe he's getting at. In response to that, I think the "figures" are actually the carvings of figures in the brackets below each window, but I can't say for sure. Epicgenius (talk) 16:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks pretty good overall I might take another pass. I have an open FAC if I can interest either of you Eddie891 Talk Work 14:24, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Eddie, I was wondering if you felt able to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, it is not obligatory to do either. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I was waiting for some responses to my more broad questions, but they in all honesty probably don't have answers so I'd be happy to support at this point, mainly on prose. Eddie891 Talk Work 18:42, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport from TRM[edit]

  • Is "Ukrainian Institute of America" not notable?
  • "house first-class residences" what does that mean?
    • I guess that does read awkwardly. How about now: Cook did not the block to be populated with high-rises and only sold lots for the construction of private, first-class residences. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "C. P. H. Gilbert[7][8][a] to design" jarring ref/note placement, why can't it just go after the comma which is literally seven words further on?
  • "the Fletcher House was" this is the one and only time you refer to it as this, was that it's original name? Probably ought to be noted in the lead.
  • "founded Sinclair Oil in 1916[2] " again, awkward ref placement and wasn't it Sinclair Oil Corporation?
  • "1922 Teapot Dome scandal,[2][9] " could use a footnote to briefly explain this so I don't have to click away from the article to find out what this was all about.
    • I have instead removed Teapot Dome from this article and merged the paragraphs.
  • "lived quietly in the mansion and died within its walls; Anne passed" POV (quietly) and euphemism (passed).
  • "of investors.[9] The investors" repetitive.
  • "the grants were "matching funds grants"," grants were grants... clunky.
  • " C.P.H. Gilbert,[a][2] " space out C. P. H. as before.
  • You link UIA and foreman in the body but not the lead.
    • Removed UIA link the body, added foreman link to the lead. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • What are "drip moldings" and "foliate reliefs"?
    • Forgotten what the first was, so I removed it. Added a Wiktionary link for the second. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "French Renaissance" is there an appropriate link for this?
  • Pardon my ongoing ignorance, what is "graven" about these seahorses?
  • "seahorse motif returns" returns? Are you saying that there are also seahorses there?
  • I'm pretty sure we don't need to link common terms like library, dining room, etc.
  • "The top two floors,[35]" what is that citation referencing?!
  • Snippets of NYT e.g. ref 13 are via=newspapers.com
  • Actually NYT archives are subscription-only so should be url-access=subscription
    • -dded. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 11:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Vami IV: I think it's only the nytimes.com domain itself (and only from 1923 to 1980) that's subscription-only. Pre-1923 and post-1980 articles on the nytimes.com domain are limited-access. Newspapers.com clippings are open-access even though the archive itself is subscription-only. Epicgenius (talk) 16:21, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Third source has (PDF), fourth (pdf), be consistent.
  • ISBNs should be consistently formatted.

That's all I have. Apologies for some of the questions if they appear dumb. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 10:23, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for the comments. I think they've all been addressed now. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:38, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: Sir, could I perhaps draw your attention back to this FAC? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:14, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My concerns have been addressed, so I'm happy to now support this candidate. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 08:26, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Spotchecks not done. Version reviewed

Pass. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:04, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's the source for the Châteauesque style claim?
  • "The house was built during the last three years of the 19th century" - technically no. Suggest providing the exact dates.
  • Why include ISSN for NYT but not other periodicals?
  • When ProQuest ID and URL are the same link, why have both?
    • I removed the URL where ProQuest IDs are available. Epicgenius (talk) 18:31, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in when/whether periodicals are linked
    • @Vami IV: I'm thinking we should remove all periodicals' links and ISSNs for consistency (especially as the NYT is well known), but I want to know what you think. Epicgenius (talk) 18:31, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm open to this, especially if the choices are overlinking or no links. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 18:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        All right. I've removed the periodicals' links and ISSNs just now. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:35, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • NYC Arts is a work title and should be italicized
  • What makes 6sqft a high-quality reliable source?
  • Be consistent in when you include retrieval date
    • Retrieval date is now used only if there is a URL and only for inline citations. Epicgenius (talk) 17:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • How are you ordering Sources? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I believe all of the above has now been addressed. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: The article has passed its source review and three supports, and the issue brought up in the image review has been resolved. Should we continue to wait for a formal passage of the image review? Epicgenius (talk) 15:15, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly I am being slow, but I am missing the point of that communication. Was there meant to be some sort of request (for closure, to start another, whatever) implicit in it? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:47, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: I am actually asking if the image reviewer needs to explicitly "pass" the image review before the nomination can be closed. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:12, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Thanks. Yes, it does. I have queried the reviewer. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Harry_F._Sinclair_House/archive1&oldid=1043218965"