User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2023/May

WikiCup 2023 May newsletter
The second round of the 2023 WikiCup has now finished. Contestants needed to have scored 60 points to advance into round 3. Our top five scorers in round 2 all included a featured article among their submissions and each scored over 500 points. They were:


 * Iazyges (1040) with three FAs on Byzantine emperors, and lots of bonus points.
 * Unlimitedlead (847), with three FAs on ancient history, one GA and nine reviews.
 * Epicgenius (636), a WikiCup veteran, with one FA on the New Amsterdam Theatre, four GAs and eleven DYKs
 * BennyOnTheLoose (553), a seasoned competitor, with one FA on snooker, six GAs and seven reviews.
 * 🇩🇪 FrB.TG (525), with one FA, a Lady Gaga song and a mass of bonus points.

Other notable performances were put in by Sammi Brie,  Thebiguglyalien,  MyCatIsAChonk,  PCN02WPS, and  AirshipJungleman29.

So far contestants have achieved thirteen featured articles between them, one being a joint effort, and forty-nine good articles. The judges are pleased with the thorough reviews that are being performed, and have hardly had to reject any. As we enter the third round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Sam H. Harris Theatre
BorgQueen (talk) 00:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Mansfield Hotel
-- RoySmith (talk) 12:02, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for 2023 New York City parking garage collapse
BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for The Jane
-- RoySmith (talk) 12:03, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel
Hi, it's me, hope you're doing well! I noticed that you added a TON of great new information on the page for the Sheraton New York Times Square Hotel (the old Americana of New York). It's a page I've done a lot of work on too. :) However, the design information you've added, while fascinating, is all at the head of the article now, before the section on the history of the hotel. I'd like to switch those, so it reflects other pages we've both worked a lot on, like the St Regis and the Hotel Pennsylvania, where the hotel history comes first and the design information about the structure and the interiors comes second. Just wanted to post here about that intention and get your feedback before taking any action. :) Jamesluckard (talk) 00:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Actually, now that I look at the St. Regis New York page, it looks like the architecture/design section there has also been moved to the front, ahead of the history. The St Regis New York is a page I originated back in 2011, and I'd love to keep the history section first, if that's okay with you too. You've added tons and tons and tons of amazing information there, so I know we both have a stake in making sure those pages have the most useful flow possible for readers. :) Jamesluckard (talk) 00:11, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Jamesluckard, thanks for the comment. Yeah, I would be fine with you moving the architecture info in the Sheraton New York Times Square article to after the history section. I tend to place the architecture section first, because it helps give context to things that are described later on in the history section (e.g. in New York Marriott Marquis and Plaza Hotel.) Anyway, I'm fine with you moving up the history section in both articles. However, there are some things that are wikilinked in the "Architecture" section but not in the "History" section of both articles. For example, in the St. Regis New York article, the architecture firm of Trowbridge and Livingston is only linked in the "Architecture" section; that article is not linked in the "History" section, since it's assumed that people read the article from top to bottom. We may need to rearrange the links so that they don't get introduced in the middle of the article, which may confuse readers. Otherwise, I have no problem with your proposed changes. – Epicgenius (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll make sure to check on any links like that and have them linked at whatever the new first mention is. There's definitely an argument to be made for each version, but I tend to think people are more likely to be looking for the history section, so it seems to make sense to put that first. Also, by putting the architecture/design section second, it can be as detailed and extensive as we like, as with the Hotel Pennsylvania page, without worrying that it will lose people before they get to the history section. But I totally understand your position too. :) Jamesluckard (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Post transit coverage
It sucks we can't use this source about increased service. The Post's transit coverage is actually journalism. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Transit and real estate seem to be among the few topics for which the Post is reliable, since the paper sometimes tends to report on things that other newspapers like the NYT or Daily News totally miss. We have to respect that the Wikipedia community deemed it unreliable. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I think it is worth a shot at trying. I also just realized that someone else is trying to do the same for sports. Kew Gardens 613 (talk) 00:11, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

new amsterdam theatre
hello, Epicgenius! i had a few questions regarding this article and the associated blurb. apologies for all the questions! i hope they're not too much trouble to address. dying (talk) 06:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * the blurb, article lead, and article body all state that the theatre was opened on the 26th, but the infobox states that it was opened on the 23rd. is there a reason for this discrepancy?  the façade and interior of the building appear to have been listed as nyc landmarks on the 23rd about 76 years later, so perhaps those dates got convoluted.
 * the blurb and article lead both state that the office wing has 10 stories, while the body mentions an "11-story office tower". i tried looking at the cited sources to resolve this discrepancy.  the lpc source mentioned "a ten-story office tower", while architectural record described "a narrow 11-story structure [with] an entrance vestibule at ground level and office space above".  is it possible that the building actually has 11 stories, with 10 of them containing offices?  after following your description of the office stories and looking at the photos, it seems to me that there may be a windowless 11th story, although this is clearly original research.  also, admittedly, "10-story office wing" suggests to me that the building itself has 10 stories and primarily consists of offices, though i am admittedly not an expert in architecture.
 * the alt text of the photo of the original lobby states that "[t]here are ticket booths to the left and elevators to the right", which seems contrary to what is shown in the floor plan. would something like "On the left wall, there are ticket booths in the foreground, and elevators in the background." be more appropriate?
 * lastly, the article body mentions that the proscenium arch is "36 feet (11 m) high and 40 feet (12 m) tall". is one of these dimensions actually referring to the width of the arch?
 * Thanks for the comments @dying; it's really no trouble. I have fixed all of these. In response to your points:
 * The opening was indeed on October 26. A New York Times article on Oct 25 says that the theater was about to open. Another article on Oct 27 reports on the theater's opening the previous night.
 * The office wing has 10 stories (I'm not sure where the 11th story comes from, as the infobox image clearly shows 10 stories). Perhaps Architectural Record is counting the roof, but I can't say for sure.
 * The alt text was an oversimplification. I've fixed it.
 * I also fixed the dimensions of the arch. The National Park Service says the arch measures "40 feet wide and 36 feet high". I think something got lost when I added the info to the article.
 * – Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * looks good, Epicgenius. thanks for addressing these issues!  dying (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you today for the article, "about one of the oldest surviving Broadway theaters, opened in 1903. Occupying a prime site just off New York City's Times Square, the theater was described by one source as being "near perfection" architecturally. The theater includes an office wing with a Beaux-Arts exterior, as well as various interior spaces in the Art Nouveau style, with a plethora of colorful murals and motifs. The theater largely hosted comedies and musicals, most notably the Ziegfeld Follies, until it became a movie house in 1936. The New Amsterdam was abandoned during the early 1980s, but Disney reopened the theater in 1997 as part of the restoration of the surrounding neighborhood. Today, the New Amsterdam is again one of Broadway's gems."! --
 * Thanks @Gerda. I appreciate the kind words. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 108 Leonard
The article 108 Leonard you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:108 Leonard for comments about the article, and Talk:108 Leonard/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kusma -- Kusma (talk) 16:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for New York Savings Bank Building
-- RoySmith (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

May 17: WikiWednesday Salon + Queering Wikipedia
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:42, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Hotel Belleclaire
Aoidh (talk) 00:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Donald Friedman's "The Structure of Skyscrapers in America 1871-1900" book
Hello, Epicgenius Have you ever been uploaded Donald Friedman's "The Structure of Skyscrapers in America 1871-1900: Their History and Preservation" book by the Association for Preservation Technology International to Internet Archive (archive.org)? Yuliadhi (talk) 13:57, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. Unfortunately I have neither uploaded that book nor checked to see if it's on archive.org. Epicgenius (talk) 14:25, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK for Dag Hammarskjöld Plaza
—Kusma (talk) 00:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

DYK nomination of The Dorilton
Hello! Your submission of The Dorilton at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Morgan695 (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Bemelmans Bar
Thanks for your assistance there, both explaining things clearly to the other editor and in finding better links. --JBL (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way, do you have any idea if this link works as a paywall link to the original database? It looks to me like it should, but I don't have immediate access to a library that subscribes to Newsbank, so I can't check for sure.  --JBL (talk) 20:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @JayBeeEll, unfortunately my libraries do not subscribe to Newsbank either, so I don't know for sure. Neither the New York Public Library, the Brooklyn Public Library, nor the Queens Public Library have subscriptions to Newsbank apparently. I can, though, look for someone else who has a Newsbank account and ask them. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:17, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the offer, but it was just idle curiosity, especially since other working links have been found for all the citations. My university library doesn't subscribe, but a nearby one in our consortium does -- so in the unlikely event I decide I really care to know, I will just walk over there some afternoon.  Thanks again!  --JBL (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Growth team newsletter #26
Welcome to the twenty-sixth newsletter from the Growth team! Help with translations

One million Suggested Edits
We passed the 1 million Suggested edits milestone in late April!
 * The Suggested edits feature (AKA Newcomer tasks) increase newcomer activation by ~12%, which flows on through to increased retention. (source)
 * Suggested edits increase the number of edits newcomers complete in their first two weeks and have a relatively low revert rate. (source)
 * Suggested edits are available on all Wikipedia language editions.
 * Newer Suggested edits, like Add a link and Add an image, aren’t yet deployed to all wikis, but these structured tasks further increase the probability that newcomers will make their first edit. (source)

Positive reinforcement
Positive reinforcement aims to encourage newcomers who have visited our homepage and tried Growth features to keep editing.
 * The new Impact module was released to Growth pilot wikis in December 2022, and we are now scaling the feature to another ten wikis.
 * The Leveling up features are deployed at our pilot wikis.
 * The Personalized praise features were deployed at our pilot wikis on May 24. Mentors at pilot wikis will start to receive notifications weekly when they have “praise-worthy” mentees. Mentors can configure their notification preferences or disable these notifications.

Add an image

 * We are creating a new section-level variation of the “add an image” task. We have tested the accuracy of suggestions, and the development of this new task is well-underway.

Other updates

 * We are progressively releasing Add a link to more wikis.
 * After adding Thanks to Recent Changes, Watchlist and Special:Contributions, we investigated Thanks usage on the wikis. There is no evidence that thanks increased after the feature was added on more pages.
 * We helped with code review for the 2023 Community Wish to add Notifications for user page edits.
 * We have been attending several community events, that we documented in our Growth’s Community events report.

What's next for Growth?

 * We shared an overview of Growth annual planning ideas, and have started community discussion about these potential projects. We would love to hear your feedback on these ideas!

'' Growth team's newsletter prepared by the Growth team and posted by bot • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe. '' 15:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

FAC review
Just wanted to remind you that it's been two weeks since you stuck your placeholder at Featured article candidates/Interstate 40 in Tennessee/archive2. I appreciate your willingness to review this nomination, but if you are still planning on doing so, I hope you will very soon, as I do not want this nomination to get archived again. Thanks in advance. Bneu2013 (talk) 23:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. I completely forgot about my promise to do a review there. I'll look at it soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. BTW, I did make some of the recommended improvements you listed on the talk page. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Just to let you know they are threatening to archive it again if it doesn't pick up a support in the next few days. I certainly disagree with this move, but I would still like to move on with this nomination. That being said, I think most outlying issues have been resolved and the article isn't far from being able to be promoted. Not trying to pressure you, I just don't want it to get archived again. Bneu2013 (talk) 06:04, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Don't worry about pressuring me; I keep forgetting to actually leave comments, which is a habitual problem every time I want to leave feedback on an FAC. I will look at it soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'd like to get it done soon regardless of what happens. Bneu2013 (talk) 19:25, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Will you have any more comments? Also, I'm trying to get more reviewers, but the maps RfC seems to have dissuaded some people. Bneu2013 (talk) 20:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I should have some more comments tomorrow. I keep forgetting about your FAC...sorry about that. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:15, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Btw, is this nomination at less of a risk of being archived since one reviewer has indicated an intent to support pending a copyedit? I personally don't get the rush given that getting an article to FA status is not something that should be taken lightly. Bneu2013 (talk) 20:32, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It may keep the FAC open for a little longer. However, it could take a while for a GOCE copyeditor to pick up the article and work on it - by the time someone works on the page, the FAC may have timed out (the FAC coords generally don't like keeping nominations open for more than two months). – Epicgenius (talk) 20:41, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * They've archived it again, and didn't even let you post your final comments. This is getting ridiculous; they've kept plenty of other nominations open longer than this. That being said, I may try one more time, but I'm starting to think I'm promoting a list cause. Bneu2013 (talk) 17:38, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to hear that they archived the FAC. I agree with you - I really do not like the time constraints posed by the FAC process. I do still want to leave comments about I-40 in Tennessee. But given the time constraints of FAC, I think it's better that I post my remaining comments on the talk page, which I can do shortly. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:58, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Are you still planning on posting comments on the talk page? Thanks. Bneu2013 (talk) 10:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am. It may take me some time, but I promise to get around to it soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:56, 30 May 2023 (UTC)