Talk:Film Center Building/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Vaticidalprophet 00:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

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

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 05:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

yeah yeah picking this one up, will be back Vaticidalprophet 05:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Lead image: Understandably, most building articles use a "street-level front shot" for the lead image, because it gets across most of the building best and is easy to take. However, given this building is very nondescript from the pictured angle, I wonder if the more distinctive File:Mcilwain ny filmcenter crop.JPG later in the article would be better in this position.
- Funnily I work relatively close by, so I'll try and see if I can get a picture of the building. (Though probably not at this exact moment, since there's a scaffold covering the entire first floor.) Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
although the ground story has a marble facade, and the second story has a white-stone facade -- this comma doesn't seem necessary.
- Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The upper stories contain offices, which were initially used largely by major film companies^[who?]
- Added an example of a major film company. Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture

includes pre-Columbian influences -- what are these?
- I have to look at the sources again, but I think the pyramidal decorations in particular. Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The sparse decoration that the building did contain is slightly overwritten ("What sparse decoration the building had").
- I knew there was a better way to write that. I've reworded it. Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first story of the entryway contains three doors, while a sign with the words "Film Center" in capital letters is mounted above the entrance. On each story of all three elevations, the outermost bays contain a pair of sash windows, while the center bays each contain a ribbon of four sash windows -- none of these need 'contain'.
- Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The eastern wall of the elevator lobby contains a multicolored mosaic -- re. 'contain' again, the use makes it a little difficult to picture this. Is the whole wall a mosaic or only part of it?
- I believe only a part of it. Epicgenius (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More to come. Vaticidalprophet 01:24, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments @Vaticidalprophet. Sorry, I forgot to ping you earlier, but I've addressed all your comments thus far. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:15, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Meant to reply on the 29th -- slipped my mind :) Just continuing this section...

I'm really not sold on the image placement of the lobby -- left-justified images aren't great at subsection beginnings. There are few enough images in the article you could reasonably right-justify them all. Having said that, there are plenty of images on Commons and more that could justifiably be included than would look non-awkward with the article's length. This...is sacrilegious, but honestly a gallery at the end of Architecture is probably the best way to handle that.

History

prone to catching fire -- bit of a hanging thread! Any more on the...issues...faced by previous film buildings?
- Actually, the source says that "those responsible for the protection of the city from fire" were worried that this would cause a fire. It doesn't specifically say these facilities caught fire. There are some sources that talk about nitrate film catching fire, but that issue isn't limited to NYC specifically. Epicgenius (talk) 23:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed a typo.
a second mortgage of $300,000 -- could use post-inflation numbers? (NYC real estate prices moment)
- Done. Epicgenius (talk) 23:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's something not addressed very much in this section, which is probably the biggest GACR concern in an otherwise strong article. This building's construction and early years coincide with the shift in gravity of the American film industry from NYC to LA -- by the time it went up, there was already much less need for a ton of film buildings throughout NYC than there was when the idea of building dedicated ones started coming up. Do any sources talk about this in ways that can be at least vaguely attached, or at the very least, serve as a "background" section/subsection on the NYC and US film industry over the timeframe? This kind of ties into what we talked about re. working on and nominating the Morgan Library & Museum -- the work on the building itself is fantastic, but for buildings where what takes place in them is more relevant, sometimes those need looked at a little more closely.
- Unfortunately, I couldn't really find sources about film storage buildings in NYC in the 1920s (in fact, most of the sources I saw were actually talking about this building). The sources I did find, like this one, tended to talk about the city's film industry as if it were still expanding. Nonetheless, I've added a sentence about the relocation of the film indutry to LA. Epicgenius (talk) 23:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That should be the lot of it. Very few notes overall, except the last one. Vaticidalprophet 22:43, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additional comments @Vaticidalprophet. Funnily, I didn't even know about the context of the NYC film industry moving to LA until just now, which is why that isn't in the article. I don't think the sources even mention it, but I agree it would probably be useful context. I will add a bit more about that later, as I'm currently on vacation. Epicgenius (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again @Vaticidalprophet. I've replied to your remaining comments now. Epicgenius (talk) 23:38, 5 September 2023 (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.