Talk:Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State

Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: April 4, 2024. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

National Register of Historic Places Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. New York City Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Architecture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Historic sites Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 November 2023 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that Mohammed went from the roof of the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State to a field in New Jersey? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2023/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State.

Links to NRHP nom:

• http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=5335
• http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=5333

They aren't loading on my current machine, so when I get home, I'll make sure the documents are the correct ones. Chris857 (talk) 15:23, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 AirshipJungleman29 talk 09:56, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

The Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State

• ... that Mohammed went from the roof of the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State to a field in New Jersey? Source: Johnston, Laurie; Anderson, Susan Heller (June 7, 1983). "New York Day by Day".
  • ALT1: ... that a sculpture of Mohammed was removed from the roof of the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State after three majority-Muslim nations complained? Source: Johnston, Laurie; Anderson, Susan Heller (June 7, 1983). "New York Day by Day".
  • ALT2: ... that the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State contains several "symbols of justice" and a "symbol of injustice"? Source: The "symbol of injustice" is the Holocaust memorial; see Anderson, Susan Heller; Dunlap, David W. (July 31, 1986). "New York Day by Day; Judges Seek Symbol of Injustice". The New York Times. For its dedication, see Harris, Lyle V. (May 23, 1990). "Dedication of Memorial Brings Calls for Harmony". Daily News. p. 548.
  • ALT3: ... that sculptures on the Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State accounted for one-fourth of its total construction cost? Source: Gray, Christopher (October 24, 1999). "Streetscapes/Appellate Division, 25th Street and Madison Avenue; A Milky White Courthouse With Rooftop Sculptures". The New York Times.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Trump Tower penthouse of Donald Trump
  • Comment: I can propose more hooks if needed.

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 14:06, 13 October 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral : Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed : Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Earwig is clear, QPQ is done and ALT0 checks out. I know that the subject of the prophet can be controversial so it is something to keep in mind. The article is well written and is cited properly. The proposed image is free and it is clear. The article is neutral and has been 5x expanded. Lightburst (talk) 19:56, 13 October 2023 (UTC) Lightburst (talk) 19:56, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State/GA1

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

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Chipmunkdavis (talk · contribs) 03:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starting this one. No first glance comments. Not remotely GA affecting, but perhaps another look at whether there needs to be a single explanatory note or whether that note can simply be in the prose. CMD (talk) 03:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images are all licenced appropriately, a mixture of public domain and cc. CMD (talk) 06:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some more detailed comments. Please let me know if any of my comments and suggestion is based off a misinterpretation.

• "is composed of two sections", I wouldn't expect a building with an annex to be described as having "two sections". Just skimming at the moment the annex gets maybe 1.5 paragraphs throughout the article, and is apparently integrated into the original building, so section doesn't work at all. I feel the lead works well just removing ""is composed of two sections".
  • Good point, I've removed it. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• A minor point beyond GACR: Rogers & Butler are redlinked in the body, I would redlink it in the lead/infobox as well assuming you feel it is notable. (If it is not, the redlink should be removed from the body.)
  • I've added a red link. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Could "with a Holocaust Memorial by Harriet Feigenbaum" be tweaked to note the memorial was added to the original, putting the sentence in line with the earlier one which noted temporal changes in statue count?
  • The memorial is actually at the far northern end of the annex; I've added that. 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
• Took me a couple of minutes to figure out "on the northeast corner of Madison Avenue and 25th Street", would it be possible to add "the intersection of"?
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Having trouble understanding the ZoLa source. Where does 74.5 feet in the article come from? (Seems likely right per eg. [1] but just checking the source here.) The lot depth of 150 in ZoLa presumably means the frontage does not cover the entire length of the lot.
  • I have no idea. The original frontage comes out to 150 feet on 25th Street and 50 feet on Madison Avenue, according to this source. I've revised this. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Is Daniel C. French part of the sixteen sculptors?
  • He is. The ten rooftop sculptures, the two rooftop sculptural groups, the caryatid carvings on Madison Avenue, and the three sets of carvings on the 25th Street facade are all designed by different sculptors. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Could "four periods of the day" have a colon after it instead of a full stop, spent a long time trying to figure that out before realising it was in the next sentence. I even checked the source which calls them "the four hours of the day", and I agree with the wording change made here but it sadly didn't help me at the time.
  • I have done that. Sorry for the confusion, I assumed that a reader might make a connection between the two sentences (e.g. they would have read these two sentences as "...the four periods of the day. These periods are morning, night, noon, and evening"). Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Might be worth shuffling the Force, Wisdom, and Caryatide images into sections they are discussed, but that is minor and stylistic. I do think it worth mentioning the seasons represented in the caption though (Winter and Autumn per my understanding of the article).
  • I'll do this in a bit. Unfortunately, I think this might cause
    MOS:SANDWICH issues, so I have left it alone for now. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• "Winter, holding a censer with a flame". Winter is not holding the censer, it is beside her. (The source says "to her left", but it's clearly on her right so maybe they mean stage left.) Additional note that the rewriting here is well done, only "nude to [the/her] waist" is the same and that seems a not uncommon phrasing.
  • I've fixed that. Thanks for the comments about the rewriting. Yeah, "nude to the waist" is so common that I thought it would be classified under
    WP:LIMITED. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• "Englishman", "Spartan", and "Greek man" feel lackluster compared to the double adjective "Chinese philosopher" and "Hebrew lawman". Could Alfred, Lycurgus, and Solon get a second adjective? Further, could Solon be described as "Athenian" instead of Greek given Lycurgus is described as Spartan? (This is in the source as well as Greek.)
  • I have changed it according to the source.
• Unsure comparing the prose description and caption of Daniel Chester French's Justice whether Justice is the whole sculptural group or just the woman. If the first, the prose needs adjusting, while if the second, the caption needs adjusting.
  • It refers to just the woman. I've added the names of French's other two sculptures to the caption. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• The Timeout source suggests the NOW sculpture installation was temporary, could this be noted in the text? It also suggests NOW should be allcaps, as does NYT. Reading both, I am not sure that "was intended to address culture wars directly" is a clear conveyance of the materials, this would benefit from being rewritten.
  • I have done all of these. The text indicates that the statue was intended to address gender inequality and gender biases, so I've added that. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Why does the Interior subsection open with "In the original plans", did the plans change?
  • Nope. I've removed that. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Beyond GACR, but I don't suppose there is a floor plan image out there that could be added?
  • Unfortunately not at this time. I can request that someone create it though. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• "George Maynard designed seals of the city and state governments of New York on either side of the triptych." Don't fully understand the meaning here, designed as in carved or similar?
  • Yes, he carved a pair of seals. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Why is the Other spaces subsection in past tense?
  • Not sure. I've fixed this now. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Beyond GACR: "There was relatively little media coverage of the building during its construction", curious if more detail could be added here as to what this means. What was the baseline for media coverage at the time?
  • This isn't in the article, but at the time, events such as the building's topping-out (and even minor events, such as the receipt of funding sources for the building) would have garnered coverage in two or three newspapers at the minimum. However, many of the events related to the building's construction were only discussed in a single newspaper; for example, the issuance of bonds for the new courthouse in June 1898 is covered in a single New York Times newspaper. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• The final paragraph in the 1960s to present subsection also reads oddly in past tense.
  • I've changed this to present tense. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• "but it regarded the sculptures as having had relatively little impact on popular art", don't have access to the source but this is confusing to read. What impact did Scientific American think sculptures could have given this review occurred when the building was opened?
  • I've removed that bit for now, given that this was a contemporary review rather than a retrospective. Epicgenius (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, well-written. Some areas of slight repetition, but all made sense given the different sections of the article. The lead touches upon all sections. Sources checked had at most minor deviations (mentioned above), nothing meriting concern. The same spotchecks found no plagiarism. No sources stood out as unreliable. I'm not sure what main aspects might be missing, articles by the same author recently approved for FA (Lever House and New Amsterdam Theatre) have similar structures. There is a great amount of detail, but there are no subarticles and the article is compact enough that nothing seems worth splitting out. No neutrality concerns found, and the article is very stable. Putting on hold given the questions and comments above, although they don't detract much from the overall quality. CMD (talk) 08:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review; I appreciate the comments. I'll be away from my computer this weekend but will hopefully be able to respond to these by Monday. Epicgenius (talk) 12:23, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No hurry on my end, best, CMD (talk) 15:20, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the review and for your patience Chipmunkdavis. I've addressed all of your comments now. Epicgenius (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A reader may logically think to connect the sentences, but sadly not this one who didn't make it to the next sentence. Full respect to

MOS:SANDWICH. A floorplan would be great if you intend to continue improving this article. The only outstanding point remaining from above is that it remains unclear to me from the prose that Daniel C French is one of the "Sixteen sculptors, overseen by Daniel Chester French". Not something that makes or breaks GACR1a on its own though, so will pass this and good luck with future development. I enjoyed reading this article. CMD (talk) 12:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]