Talk:Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo House

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Help

I could not find "The Rhinelander Mansion" nor "The Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo Mansion" in the Lists of National Historic Landmarks. Is it listed under a different name? The article mentions that it was "purchased by a nearby church in the late 1960s".. maybe it's listed under some church name (I have seen some). Am I looking in the wrong place? Thanks in advance, --Abu Badali 14:23, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See added citation. Doctalk 19:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's the National Register of Historic Places not the Lists of National Historic Landmarks. Are they the same? Why does teh building appears on the first (that is a commercial site), but not in the second (that is a .gov site)?. I'm confused. --Abu Badali 22:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the "reference" for a while. It was:
<ref>Waldo, Gertrude Rhinelander, Mansion (added 1980 - Building - #80002727) retrieved August 29, 2006 </ref>
Awaiting for clarifications. --Abu Badali 14:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
With the lack of clarifications on the matter, I removed the mention to National Historic Landmark. It should be readded when we fix this sourcing problems.

Weasel Words

I removed the following text in accordance to

WP:AWW
:

"It has been suggested that she ran out of money before it was complete. "

If any source is found, feel free to rephrase and readd the information to the article. --Abu Badali 23:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictions in New York Times articles In researching this for Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo, I found

If I read them correctly, the 2010 article says that Mrs Waldo bought the property at 72nd and Madison in 1882 and started construction in 1894, while the 1915 story says she inherited real estate in 1882 and sold most of it in 1896 to buy the lot and start the new mansion. Can anyone disentangle the elements? (I think that more than one piece of property is involved.)

—— Shakescene (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The real estate included the mansion's site and some other land. She sold some other property in 1896 to finance the current house's construction (the sources still disagree on exactly when construction started). – Epicgenius (talk) 20:43, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

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 Lightburst talk 22:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo House
The Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo House
5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 648 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Epicgenius (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]


General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Good article, passes Earwig, long enough, and fully sourced. A very good article on a unique building. Onceinawhile (talk) 15:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Onceinawhile: Thanks for the review, I appreciate it. To clarify, were the above hooks struck because there were issues with them, or were they just not interesting? Epicgenius (talk) 17:56, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Epic. No issues with any of the hooks, I just felt it was incumbent upon me to choose the hookiest hook 🪝 for the promoter to use. Onceinawhile (talk) 22:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 16:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: 750h+ (talk · contribs) 05:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Epicgenius, I'll take this review.  750h+ | Talk  05:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment table

Good Article
review progress box
WP:CV
()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4.
free or tagged images
()
6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the
Good Article criteria. Criteria marked
are unassessed

Lead section

  • Constructed from 1894 to 1898, it was designed by Alexander Mackintosh of the architectural firm of Kimball & Thompson. Might be personal preference, but I feel like "Built between 1894 and 1898" has a better flow.  750h+ | Talk  13:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • You might consider linking
    facade in the second paragraph.  750h+ | Talk  00:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo bought the site in 1882 but did not develop it for more than a decade. change her full name to her last name, as you’ve mentioned her previously.  750h+ | Talk  00:14, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The building became a Ralph Lauren menswear store in 2010. maybe link it to the Ralph Lauren brand? Might also be personal preference though.  750h+ | Talk  00:17, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those are my lead complaints.

Site

Architecture

  • The Gertrude Rhinelander Waldo House at 867 Madison Avenue is four and a half stories tall. You've already mentioned the fact it is at 867 Madison Avenue. Do we need to mention this again?  750h+ | Talk  13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • A New York Times reporter wrote in 1984 link
    New York Times.  750h+ | Talk  13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • In the basement was a large bowling alley. Sounds a bit weirdly phrased. I feel like "A large bowling alley was in the basement."  750h+ | Talk  13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first floor was a large center hall extending one-third the width of the Madison Avenue frontage, with mahogany paneling on the walls and ceiling. Link Mahogany, if that's right.  750h+ | Talk  13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link
    fluorescent lights.  750h+ | Talk  13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • "After the 1980s renovation, it had green walls with portraits; elaborate plasterwork; wood paneling; and vaulted ceilings." Do we really need semi-colons? Or can we replace these with commas?  750h+ | Talk  13:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've reworded this to remove the need for a semicolons (otherwise it sounds like the walls had plasterwork, paneling, and vaulted ceilings). Epicgenius (talk) 14:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History

Impact

Nothing from me, this is fine.

Image review—pass

The prose is excellent. So are the images. The images included are appropriately licensed, so this is an image pass.

Source review

Reviewing this version

  • Source 1 OK, checked on each instance of usage, checked via Google Books
  • Source 2 OK, checked on each instance of usage, checked via Open Library
  • Source 3 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 10 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 20 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 27 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 30 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 48 OK, checked on each instance of usage, Newspapers.com source
  • Source 65 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 95 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 120 OK
  • Source 121 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 138 OK, checked on each instance of usage
  • Source 191 OK, both sources were checked.

Happy to pass the source review.

Verdict

No comments left, happy to pass this article for GA status. Great job on it.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.