Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/New York City/archive3

New York City
The principal objection to the last nomination was referencing. I believe this has now been largely addressed. Another objection was the length. The article has shrunk a little since the last nom, and I think most of the sections are concise and interesting summaries with little superfluous detail. However, I don't think it is practicable to get this article below, say, 40k. I will do my best to respond to objections during the FAC process. –Joke 13:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Archived nom, previously nominated version


 * Mild Support. The facts, layout, etc. are all well-executed. Some of the prose could use polishing but there's nothing so ugly it makes me want to oppose. I'll take a shot at some of it later. Andrew Levine 14:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. The article's citations are inconsistent - later sections are peppered with in-text citations, while the history and geography sections are largely uncited. At 62 KB the article is a little long, ~ 50 KB would be a good size. There could be less images on the page, at some points the images distract from the text. It is a lot better than previous, bloated versions though and is really close to FAC status. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. External links could use trimming as well. --Jtalledo (talk) 16:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I tried to improve the citations in history and geography. Consistent with Summary style there are no citations for many facts, which are much more extensively discussed in articles like Industrial Workers of the World, New York City Subway and Robert Moses all contain authoritative references to their subjects, not to mention History of New York City. The three books by Jackson listed in further reading are also good references. Is there something else I can do in these sections? It seems inappropriate to put a citation with every sentence in such a brief summary section, but I have tried to add them where it seems they might be called for. –Joke 19:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I find it really hard to see how the article can be made much shorter. I think the key here is to keep sections short and to keep the sections free of anything but the minimum useful summary. Do you have any suggestions? I have organized the external links. Aside from the official website, it wasn't clear what to do with them – it seems like if we keep any, we should keep them all, and if we remove any, they all ought to go. Comments? I will have a look at the pictures. –Joke 19:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Object, prose 2a. Prose is not compelling, brilliant.  Throughout the boroughs there are hundreds of distinct neighborhoods in the city, many with a definable history and character all their own.  Please put categories in alphabetical order.  Sandy 17:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Response I have fixed this rough passage. Do you have any other examples you would like to point out? I've been over the article a few times, and I think User:Wv235 has as well, but a fresh set of eyes really helps. (Categories: done.) –Joke 19:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That was only an example: the entire text needs to be gone over.  I've had another look, and the prose is still not compelling, but a bigger concern is the lack of references.  Once the article is thoroughly referenced, I'll re-examine the prose.  Also, the References need some improvement in terms of bibliographic style:  they are inconsistent.  For example, at times, the author of a newspaper article is available in the URL, but not given in the ref.  Please remember that, if URLs are taken down, a reader needs to be able to find the article.  Please make the references entry into a formal style; we can't depend on the URL to always be available.  Here's an example of a large section of text with no references:
 * New York City emerged from World War II as the unquestioned leading city of the world, with Wall Street leading America's emergence as the world's dominant economic power, the United Nations headquarters (built in Manhattan in 1952) emphasizing its political influence, and the rise of Abstract Expressionism displacing Paris as center of the art world. The growth of post-war suburbs saw a slow decline in the city's population. Later, changes in industry and commerce, white flight, and rising crime rates pushed New York into a social and economic crisis in the 1970s.
 * The entire article needs to be thoroughly referenced: the above section is only one small sample. "Unquestioned leading city in the world" can't make it without a reference. Sandy 12:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Response I am working on the references. They are now entirely consistent, and usually point to a reasonable source, although some things still must be referenced. –Joke 17:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * weak support While some sections don't quite meet 2a (only just missing it), I think that the article is well put together, well referanced, and informative. Th ε Halo Θ 10:31, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - Problems with referencing continue in the History, Geography, Cityscape and Climate sections. Also, the lead is quite short for such a long article and should be expanded. The length of the article itself does not concern me; New York City is a big subject, and the use of summary style and daughter articles is solid. —Cuivi é nen 16:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Response Ok, I rationalized some footnotes so that the figures in Cityscape are properly attributed. I would appreciate some more specific comments, particular regarding my comments on referencing History and Geography above. I feel like I'm working in a vacuum here. As for the lead, I think having a short lead is a feature: it hits the salient points and allows the reader to get right into the most appropriate part of the article. Is there anything really important missing? –Joke 16:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object - architecture, education and environmental sections are over-indulgent - the energy efficieny of the governments cars is not really interesting, nor does the reader need a two sentence description of all the colleges in the city. There is a fair bit of statistical information without sources, like the number out tourists, cabs and so on. The sport section is just a bunch of disconnected sentences.--Peta 04:40, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Also the TOC is bloated with unnecessary h3s, text doesn't need a heading if it only a paragraph.--Peta 01:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Response I have fixed the TOC and I'm working on the rest. The references are now entirely consistent, and I'm trying to make sure all the statistical information is thoroughly referenced. I agree that the sports section is rather fragmented, but it is pretty hard to have any kind of narrative structure in the section. Basically, it needs to compactly list the major sports teams in the city without getting too bloated – it seems to do that, more or less, and doesn't seem worse than the sections in other FAs, such as Boston, Massachussetts. –Joke 17:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your efforts so far, writing a coherent sports section isn't that hard, see Canberra.--Peta 00:47, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Response Well, I gave it a shot. I've asked people to try to find a reference for baseball being New York City's most popular sport – historically this is obvious, and it is probably true even now, but my research energy is drained for the day. Aside from that I think the section has been improved. –Joke 02:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment While I'm with you about the colleges, I do actually think that it is interesting and remarkable that the NYC government is a leader in energy efficiency policy amongst US cities. Although I removed the bit about the underwater turbines, as it is unlikely to have much impact on the city's energy needs. –Joke 00:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Object, too long. Stifle (talk) 12:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Response Can I ask that you offer more than two words? What sections, in particular, are too long? Do you think the summary style has not been adequately used here? –Joke 17:57, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

2 months later, the nomination of New York City as a featured article returns! I looked over some of the problems with the last namination and decided to do some research:


 * {|class="wikitable"

!Wikipedia Article !Total size !"readable prose" !# Words August 2006
 * Seattle, Washington
 * 83K
 * 49K
 * 7800
 * Detroit, Michigan
 * 69K
 * 40K
 * 6300
 * San Francisco, California
 * 81K
 * 39K
 * 6250
 * Boston, Massachusetts
 * 59K
 * 37K
 * 5900
 * New York City
 * 57K
 * 33K
 * 5300
 * }
 * New York City
 * 57K
 * 33K
 * 5300
 * }

These are other cities that are currently featured articles. In comparison, I think New York City should have made the cut since that was the main issue. Blackjack48 21:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)


 * April 2006 FAC
 * July 2006 FAC --Paul 12:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Comment So how much "readable prose" is there in the NYC article?--DaveOinSF 21:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
 * By my count, there are 5300 words and 33K of "readable prose" in the NYC article.--DaveOinSF 01:29, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, just what do you two mean by "readable prose"? The text of the article excluding footnotes, captions & infoboxes? Please, let's try not to use jargon that not all Wikipedians either are not familiar with -- or are unable to easily find a published definition for. -- llywrch 16:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry, didn't think this was obscure. According to Article size:
 * "Readable prose" is the main body of the text, excluding sections such as:


 * Footnotes and reference sections ("see also", "external links", footnotes, bibliography, etc)
 * Diagrams and images
 * Tables and lists
 * Wikilinks and external URLs
 * Formatting and mark-up.
 * --DaveOinSF 16:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Object. Some items to address:
 * 1) Please correct the links so that the article talk page links to the failed FAC as well as the new FAC.  I can't find the old FAC, but I seem to recall that I objected to a POV issue, which still seems to be present.  The failed FAC shouldn't be removed from the talk page:  has the new FAC overwritten the older one?
 * 2) I don't recall what the older objection on prose size was, but I come up with Overall 57KB, 35 KB prose, which is a "normal" and acceptable article size, but seems a bit short for an important city, in relation to the others.  This should not be an objection if this article makes good use of Summary Style (and perhaps the others didn't).  Without seeing the older FAC, it's hard to understand why this issue is raised.  (For those who asked, here is how readable prose was explained to me.)
 * 3) The article needs to conform to WP:GTL:  please reorganize sections.  (See all of the articles you referenced above:  they are done correctly.)
 * 4) I still have a POV objection, which I believe I raised in the last FAC.
 * It emerged from the war as the unquestioned leading city of the world, with Wall Street leading America's emergence as the world's dominant economic power, the United Nations headquarters (built in 1952) emphasizing its political influence, and the rise of Abstract Expressionism displacing Paris as the center of the art world.[6]
 * PBS very well may believe that New York City is the Center of the Universe, and they may have even found others who agree. But, baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet aside, asserting that opinion as fact, even based on a reliable (albeit biased) source, is POV.  "Unquestioned leading city of the world" is an extraordinary claim:  it requires extraordinary sources.  It would be easier to accept if London and Paris sources said the same thing.
 * 1) Reference 8 is missing.
 * 2) Please expand all refs (example ref 35, Safest cities according to SanJose gov.)
 * 3) I cleaned up some typos in a couple of refs just to give you a sample of work needed.  Since this is your second nom, the refs should exemplify our best work :-)
 * 4) Lacking citations - examples from one section only - there are numerous others throughout the article:
 * (Where is this article?) Writer Tom Wolfe said of New York that "Culture just seems to be in the air, like part of the weather."
 * (Where did you get this number of seats?) The city's 39 largest theatres (with more than 500 seats) are collectively known as "Broadway," after the major thoroughfare through the Times Square theatre district.
 * (Likely true, so why not provide a source?) The Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts, which includes Jazz at Lincoln Center, the Metropolitan Opera, the New York City Opera, the New York Philharmonic and the New York City Ballet, is the largest performing arts center in the United States.

These examples are only a start: the article needs more work. Sandy 16:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) New Jersey Nets are a New York Team?  New York has two NBA teams: the New York Knicks and the New Jersey Nets.
 * 2) Weasle words, no cite. New York is often called "the media capital of the world".
 * Well, they were the New York Nets originally, and might be moving back there. In the sports world, they generally are considered a New York team. The article could explain this a bit better though. --W.marsh 22:09, 19 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose per Sandy Georgia KnightLago 01:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Object Some problems with the footnotes:
 * 2 needs access date
 * 4 needs access date
 * 5 needs expanding; what is referred to?
 * 8 is missing
 * 9 needs page reference if possible
 * 10 needs page reference if possible
 * 12 needs page reference if possible
 * 18 needs page reference if possible & WPA Guide needs publisher & year
 * 24 needs page reference if available
 * 35 needs expanding: who? when?
 * 37 publication data?
 * 42 publication date?
 * 48 Bureau of Transportatin Statistics .. US? NYC? NY State?

I would love to see NYC get FA status, as it and London are the top two Global World Cities and they deserve FA-quality articles. I hope some editors take the suggestions mentioned here and make some progress. --Paul 17:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose per referencing problems and above. Never Mystic (tc) 20:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)