Talk:Stuyvesant Farm

Stuyvesant Farm has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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: September 2, 2021. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Stuyvesant Farm appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 September 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that when England moved to take over the Dutch colony of New Netherland in 1664, a delegation met at Stuyvesant Farm to negotiate the Articles of Surrender? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Stuyvesant Farm.

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

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.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

The Manatus map at the full extent makes Bowery No. 1 difficult to find. Zooming into the map with a focus on the current lower Manhattan makes it easier to find, shown below as Option B:

Historical Maps of Bowery No. 1

Option A	Option B	Option C
	{{{annotations}}} Bowery No. 1, marked on the Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft next to No. 16.	{{{annotations}}} Bowery No. 1, marked on the Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft next to No. 16.

I propose updating the article to show Option B. Comments? - DutchTreat (talk) 11:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added Option C with a tigher crop/zoom into the farm and creek - DutchTreat (talk) 11:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, these are great. I like Option C best, as it focuses on the manor house and creek, while still showing the relationship to Fort Amsterdam.--Pharos (talk) 16:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am also enjoying the detail available in Option C. I'll replace the current map with this one. - DutchTreat (talk) 13:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Created a cropped image on Commons due to rendering issues with the {{Annotated image}}:

Option D

Option E

1

Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft (North to right) 1 Bowery No. 1    Fort Amsterdam

- DutchTreat (talk) 10:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article updated with Option E - DutchTreat (talk) 10:33, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Stuyvesant Farm/GA1

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 14:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

• "Peter Stuyvesant's house on the Great Bowery." fragment so no full stop required.
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "of Peter Stuyvesant, as well" I think it's worth giving a bit of context as to who this individual was, at this point in the lead.
  • Immediately afterward, the sentence says that Stuyvesant was preceded in the position as Director of New Netherland. So either it would be repetitive to say "Director of New Netherland" before Stuyvesant's name, or the sentence needs to be rewritten. This isn't my nomination though. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good point User:Epicgenius. I rewrote the sentence. Please let me know what you think. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

      I removed a stray semicolon, since these aren't two separate sentences. Otherwise, it looks good. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• "namesake of numerous local sites and institutions.[1][2][3]" those references don't need to be in the lead if they are used in the main body of the article in the "Namesakes" section (for example).
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• By "Dutch colonization", do you mean Dutch colonization of the Americas? Is that a suitable link?
  • Done. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "Dutch colonization ... Dutch colonization..." in consecutive sentences, bit repetitive.
  • Done. Seemed like the meaning could be retain by just removing the second instance. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "Manatus map of 1639 ..." font on this looks a bit odd, or am I imagining it?
  • {{overlay}} seems to just have a parameter for title, and it's a bit bigger. We could try to resize it to be more like a regular image caption (does anyone know if <small> would suffice?)... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "came to control Bowery No. 1 when he became" came/became, maybe "took control of"?
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "Boweries 2- 6 " unspaced en-dash here.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "director of New Netherland" vs "Director of New Netherland", consistency.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "company Directors in " don't think this needs to be capitalised.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "Terms were generous enough..." this sentence is unreferenced.
  • Done. Added new citation here --Wil540 art (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Several entries in the Timeline are unreferenced, or if they are, they're not inline with some of the sentences.
  • Fixed. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "1776 Ratzer Map" avoid starting sentences/fragments with a numeral, and is "Map" needed to be capitalised?
  • I elaborated on the origin and details of the map. Not sure if it is too much info for caption. --Wil540 art (talk) 03:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• And who/what is "Ratzer"?
  • Bernard Ratzer - I added him to the image caption. --Wil540 art (talk) 03:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "1793, 1795-99 " en-dash and full year range required.
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• What are "NYCL" and "NRHP"?
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Last three sentences of Residences section are unreferenced.
  • Done.--Wil540 art (talk) 19:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "The creeks emptied..." unreferenced.
  • Done.--Wil540 art (talk) 02:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "The tree stood .. where it stood" repetitive.
  • Done.--Wil540 art (talk) 02:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "founding of Kiehl's at" explain what Kiehl's is.
  • Sufficient to add its full name at the time (Kiehl's Pharmacy)? (Also, I added a ref in support there). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The full name at the time sounds appropriate to me. --Wil540 art (talk) 03:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "Manhattan Blue Book, 1868" what's that?
  • Added context to this caption. For reference, it's talking about this. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• ""Stuyvesant pear tree." fragment, no full stop.
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• "Modern namesakes" these should be inline referenced even if they are linked to Wikipedia articles.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 02:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for thorough review! The fine folks at WikimediaNYC and I have taken care of nearly everything above. The last unanswered issue is with the font size in the Overlay image which I do not know how to address. It does look slightly bigger to me as well. --Wil540 art (talk) 02:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally it can be addressed, but no reason not to promote, which I will now do. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created a map with the Stuyvesant Farm highlighted based on Ratzer's Plan of New York (1770). I propose this diagram replace the two annotated images from the same basemap. This one image has some usability benefits by reducing the screen space used in the article and makes zooming to a higher resolution easier.

Comments welcome. - DutchTreat (talk) 10:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Two annotated images of Ratzer map replaced with one merged view. - DutchTreat (talk) 11:42, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's an error with what is currently footnote 27 ( Burrows & Wallace 1999, p. 50); that footnote uses sfn formatting but there isn't a linked bibliography; also there isn't actually a Burrows & Wallace 1999 source listed, it appears to be 1998. Not having the source, I don't want to presume to correct it. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:52, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]