Draft talk:20 Times Square

I have added a number of references from various authoritative sources throughout the draft which mention the new building. Hopefully this article is now verifiable and suitable for moving to the mainspace? Thanks Boingster (talk) 18:17, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Boingster


 * Those sources are much better than any you had before. The next step would be summarizing what they say about 20 Times Square instead of just adding them at the end like an afterthought. Huon (talk) 20:19, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I have redistributed the new references throughout the piece where they are most relevant, rather than dumping them all at the end. I've also added in some information on the history of the building and the increase in planned size. One question - should I add after the vanity address allocation as I still can't find the official city documentation (not sure it's published online), although it is clear that the development is using the 20 Times Square name and that the building is real (being built and leased)? Thanks Boingster (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Boingster

I have fixed some of the issues in the article. Of course, it still needs to be worked on, but I'll resubmit this. Epicgenius (talk) 00:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Evening Joe, Thanks for taking the time to review my entry on 20 Times Square. Firstly, have you really received threats and harassment as your profile suggests? That's crazy - was it over an emotive topic? Anyway, back to the more mundane subject of 20 Times Square... Wikipedia requires entries to reference at least two reliable and independent sources, like newspapers, magazines, official documents, etc. This article cites news sources including NY Times, NY Post, Real Estate Weekly and Commercial Observer. I'm assuming these are considered reputable, but that they're not being used correctly, so I was hoping you could be a little more specific about the information in the article which requires adequate referencing? In essence, are there particular themes which require further citations or perhaps a section which needs a focus? All pointers gratefully received. Cheers Boingster Boingster (talk) 01:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)Boingster

As I was typing my note to JD I saw Epicgenius has made some amends - thanks for the help (headlines were never my strong point). I've actually removed the last sentence in the introductory para (about potential retailers) as this is unsubstantiatable at this stage and Epicgenius' citation referenced a different building that never made it past the planning stage. Boingster (talk) 01:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)Boingster

Sorry - also removed the new Design section as this also referred to different building. This article should hopefully clear up the confusion about the planned Port Authority Bus Terminal development which never got off the ground (you are currently redirected here when search for 20 Times Square).


 * It's OK that you removed it. I'll try to find better refs for this article tomorrow. Epicgenius (talk) 02:05, 5 June 2014 (UTC)