Talk:48 Wall Street/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 00:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Review follows:

Comments
That's it for prose, nicely done. Other stuff to come... Feel free to discuss any/all of my comments and any/all of my light copyediting. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "Built in 1927&#x2013;1929" Infobox says 1928?
 * "a multitude of " -> "many"?
 * ", its former banking hall " was the museum opened in a different year? If so, say that. If not, leave as is
 * No, it was opened the same year.
 * "in 2001, and was designated a city landmark by the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission in 1998" shouldn't these be flipped?
 * ""slightly irregular" " what is this quoting?
 * Removed the quote.
 * A map of the plot would be useful for the 'site' section?
 * "As such, the Wall Street side was at the same elevation" was but isn't now?
 * "ew bank buildings were typically one of two types" in NYC or around the world?
 * "were provided above the" would "were built above" or "were placed above" or something comparable fit better?
 * "Georgian models rather than domestic models" so Georgian models are foreign? Unclear to an uninformed reader
 * No idea so I removed it. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "Due to the narrow street grid" unclear to an unformed reader why that would make most of the ornamentation on the base
 * "The base also incorporates two cornerstones from the previous buildings on the site, both dating from 1797" wouldn't this fit better in the previous paragraph?
 * "fourth and 14th floors" MOS:NUMNOTES: "Comparable values should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if one of the numbers would normally be written differently" . this occurs several times throughout the article
 * "Anthemia" uncommon term, link or wiktionary?
 * ""lantern" " why is this in quotes? could have a clearer description of exactly what is meant by lantern, especially w/o an img?
 * That is how the sources described it. I clarified epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "was originally gilded"... but is _____ now?
 * Still is. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "roundel" rather uncommon term
 * ✅ Linked.
 * "the Walton family mansion" could use a location and/or link?
 * On Pearl Street. It was William Walton (merchant). epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "the structure was completely fireproof" meaning what?
 * Dunno. I removed it. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "Broadway–Seventh Avenue subway line" link?
 * Already linked above as IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line, so I didn't repeat the link. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "not alleviate the bank's lack of space" it was not previously mentioned that there was a lack of space in need of alleviation?
 * Rephrased.
 * "would cost $5 million if the facades " no inflation template?
 * "Corsair Group and Swig Burris Equities" why red link one but not the other?
 * ✅ I thought you were asking why one was a link and the other wasn't. Since both are red links, this is fine. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "National Register of Historic Places in 2003" You say 2001 in the lede?
 * The 2001 date is wrong. I fixed it. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Critical reception is wanting of dates to anchor the quotes
 * you use Efn and  inconsistently, suggest standardizing
 * Earwig's has 60%, but looking at it, it's mainly quotes lining up, so fine.
 * Already linked above as IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line, so I didn't repeat the link. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "not alleviate the bank's lack of space" it was not previously mentioned that there was a lack of space in need of alleviation?
 * Rephrased.
 * "would cost $5 million if the facades " no inflation template?
 * "Corsair Group and Swig Burris Equities" why red link one but not the other?
 * ✅ I thought you were asking why one was a link and the other wasn't. Since both are red links, this is fine. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "National Register of Historic Places in 2003" You say 2001 in the lede?
 * The 2001 date is wrong. I fixed it. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Critical reception is wanting of dates to anchor the quotes
 * you use Efn and  inconsistently, suggest standardizing
 * Earwig's has 60%, but looking at it, it's mainly quotes lining up, so fine.
 * you use Efn and  inconsistently, suggest standardizing
 * Earwig's has 60%, but looking at it, it's mainly quotes lining up, so fine.
 * Earwig's has 60%, but looking at it, it's mainly quotes lining up, so fine.
 * Eddie891, thanks for the extensive review. I have fixed these issues. epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Source Spotcheck
 * overall sourcing is very good.
 * 48b source says "more than fifty percent"
 * This is referring to March 1928 (source 48a). By the time the building opened in 1929, it was 100% leased (as referenced in source 52). epicgenius (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Check source #66, that URL times out for me, and accessing it via ProQuest, I don't see mention of 'October'
 * That source is known to be down a lot, so I just removed the exact month. epicgenius (talk) 13:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * : just two things about sourcing. Eddie891 Talk Work 12:02, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This article is well written, comprehensive, well referenced, well illustrated (though it's a shame there's no full image) and otherwise meets the GA criteria. For 48a and I just meant that the article says more than 50% and the article says just 50% but looking back at it, 50% is included in more than 50% so it's fine as is. I'm happy to pass this article now. Well done and congrats! Eddie891 Talk Work 14:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)