Template:Did you know nominations/Architecture of Seattle


 * 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:44, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Architecture of Seattle

 * ... that several present-day Seattle buildings deliberately evoke traditional regional Native American architecture? Source:, , ,
 * Comment: This has been a long time as a draft. User:Bri requested that it be moved to main space. I (Jmabel) might have held off a bit longer, but since it's been moved, a DYK is now or never, so I'm requesting one.
 * Comment: This has been a long time as a draft. User:Bri requested that it be moved to main space. I (Jmabel) might have held off a bit longer, but since it's been moved, a DYK is now or never, so I'm requesting one.

Created by Jmabel (talk). Self-nominated at 03:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC).
 * Comment I don't see any good way to work the title of this particular article into the hook without making the hook clunky, but I'm open to ideas.
 * I've now reviewed Burebista. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 04:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You will have to bold something, and don't think you can bold the whole piped phrase. How about this:
 * ALT1: ... that several buildings in Seattle deliberately evoke traditional regional Native American architecture (example pictured)? - I am willing to review, but have no time right now, perhaps later today. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:09, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd be fine with that rewording. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * By the way, The article includes five photos of such architecture, so if someone thinks (for example) an exterior photo would be preferable, we also have those. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I looked at the other four, but think this one is best in small size. Now review:
 * Symbol question.svg Substantial article, with more than 100 good references, and well illustrated. Hook interesting, and with a good licensed image. Article: we'll have to look at different aspects.
 * We should normally have only information in the lead that is a summary of facts in the body, then the lead doesn't need any citation. Please move them to the facts below.
 * That is by no means a universal. Seattle and San Francisco (Featured Articles) don't follow that approach, nor does London, a Good Article. And those are literally the first 3 FA/GAs I could find when I went to check this out. (Ditto for New York City, but it's not an FA/GA. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not happy with the long captions in the galleries. You could do two things: make the images larger, or organize images and commentary horizontally, as for example here.
 * The example you link seems to have an awful lot of white space. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer the more general section about architects more at the beginning, - was quite surprised that it came after all ;)
 * Done. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have never seen references and links to Wikimedia within a section, - wonder what other think about that.
 * That was someone other than me making notes for article expansion. As I said, a couple of us were working on this as a draft & someone more or less unilaterally moved it to article space. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I wonder if the detailed lists should even go to a separate article. Enough for now, I guess? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanations and action. What do you think of a completely different lead, more a summary than detailed the recent expansions, and getting a "citation needed" for it. I tried to help by saying the lead normally is summary without citation. Can't approve with that tag, DYK? (FAs I know (not by me, but four different main authors) are for examples Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., Leningrad première of Shostakovich's Symphony No. 7 (one ref, for a quote), Columbia River and Piano Concerto No. 24 (Mozart), and I like their clean looks.) - The horizontal arrangement is also not by me, and your captions are long, so would not create much white space. It was just one idea, because - have you seen it on a small screen? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:24, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think the issues you are raising are what the article most needs at this time. I'm not that concerned with DYK and what you are asking for (e.g. about the captions) would take hours if it weren't to result in a lot of information loss. If you or someone else want to take the article that way, and can do so without making it less informative, feel free. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 16:43, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please let's separate two things, DYK is one, and readability is another, where I feel free to make suggestions. What I see as an image caption, is for example,
 * The Satterlee House
 * (1906) at 4866 Beach
 * Drive S.W. in West
 * Seattle, one of the
 * grander examples of the
 * Foursquare or Box style


 * and that is only one rather short example, of many images in galleries. - Needed for an approval: please get rid of the "citation required" tag, and delete or comment out so far unused section headers.


 * Are you saying I should not indicate the 8 or so places in the article where I've made a statement for which I don't yet have a formal citation? - Jmabel &#124; Talk 03:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, because someone will complain. You could make notes for yourself, or you could comment out an unsourced fact until after DYK. This is an unusual article, and should not be "punished" for being great, but a simple rule is "one citation minimum per paragraph", preferably at the end. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:26, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's just not DYK it. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 15:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You mean that commenting out 8 notices and perhaps facts is too much to ask? It's up to you, but I fear our readers wouldn't even know what they are missing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * So you are saying that if I comment out those notices you would be willing to let this go forward? - Jmabel &#124; Talk 04:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * yes --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:24, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Done - Jmabel &#124; Talk 23:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg Thank you! 150 refs!!! Offline sources accepted AGF. The image is licensed and a good illustration. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 27 October 2017 (UTC)