Talk:Manhattan House

Manhattan House has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 8, 2023. (Reviewed version).

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Manhattan House appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 March 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that a condominium conversion of Manhattan House (pictured) cost US$1.1 billion and took ten years?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2023/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Manhattan House.

Did you know nomination

The following 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 Bruxton (talk) 13:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Manhattan House

... that Manhattan House was one of the first apartment buildings in New York City to use white brick on its facade? Source: Mooney, Jake (April 15, 2007). "White Bricks and Pale Imitations". The New York Times.
- ALT1: ... that Manhattan House was described as the first large apartment house to use "full ceramic brick impervious to dirt and stain" on its facade? Source: "N. Y. Life Project to Use Special Vitreous Brick". New York Herald Tribune. February 24, 1950. p. 31
- ALT2: ... that a condominium conversion of Manhattan House cost $1.1 billion and took ten years? Source: Velsey, Kim (December 9, 2015). "The Bloomingdale's of Apartment Buildings—Manhattan House Conversion Draws to a Close". Observer.
- ALT3: ... that a $1.1 billion condominium conversion of Manhattan House was among the most expensive in New York City's history? Source: Fung, Amanda (June 29, 2009). "Landmark conversion on track, but sales lag". Crain's New York Business. Vol. 25, no. 26. p. 2.
- ALT4: ... that to allow the Manhattan House apartment building to be constructed with fewer setbacks, its developer donated part of the site so a nearby street could be widened? Source: Manhattan House (PDF). New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (Report). October 30, 2007. p. 6
- ALT5: ... that the residents of Manhattan House included its own architect and a future princess? Source: Landmarks Preservation Commission 2007, p. 8.
- ALT6: ... that Manhattan House, one of the first white-brick apartment buildings in New York City, was characterized as "really the very best of a bad lot"? Source: Mooney, Jake (April 15, 2007). "White Bricks and Pale Imitations". The New York Times.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Pete Sutherland

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 16:14, 3 March 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Manhattan House; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

The article has been expanded fivefolds, long enough, referenced, neutral and no copyvio obvious. The hooks are sourced and interesting. AGF offline sources. The image here and in the article are free. QPQ done. Good to go. Corachow (talk) 18:38, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Haha, @Corachow: I just reviewed the DYK as well but you beat me to the edit! I'll go find another to do. (@Epicgenius: best of luck on the GAN!) Schminnte (talk • contribs) 18:44, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Bruxton (talk) 14:43, 8 August 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.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Manhattan House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 20:05, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to review this article. Bruxton (talk) 20:05, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Not exactly stated in the body: "one of the first apartment buildings in New York City to use glazed white brick on its facade" Under facade our article states: " first large apartment house to use "full ceramic brick impervious to dirt and stain" on its facade."
- I don't blame you for the confusion, as the wording in the Facade section is a little indirect. The first sentence of the "Facade" section says: "The facade is made of white brick, making Manhattan House one of the first apartment buildings in New York City to use that material on its facade." If I replaced "that material" with "white brick", it would be clearer. Epicgenius (talk) 13:33, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The lead states: "central "spine" with five wings facing north and south, as well as low-rise retail podiums to the west and east". I am only able to find the wording of "five sections" in the body (Form). And another line in Form that says: "there are ten wings in total." Bruxton (talk) 22:05, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you added some clarity to the body. Bruxton (talk) 16:33, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Site

Citation 2 checks out
Citation 9 checks out Bruxton (talk) 22:19, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture

Sources check out in the opening paragraph of the section Bruxton (talk) 22:09, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
39 checks out Bruxton (talk) 19:39, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

History

citations check out
Citation 31 checks out. p142 Bruxton (talk) 19:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tenants

Citations check out Bruxton (talk) 16:27, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Impact

Citations check out Bruxton (talk) 16:30, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

Copyright

Earwig is at more is 47.9% but I can only see titles and one quote causing the score. I will nevertheless go through the other citations. Bruxton (talk) 22:54, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Yes
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Yes
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Yes
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes
	2c. it contains no original research.	Yes
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Yes
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes
	7. Overall assessment.

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.