Talk:Harry F. Sinclair House/GA1

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.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 01:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

tomorrow... Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:49, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Images look good Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:30, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

sources are reliable + well formatted Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Article is stable Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest using {{inflation}} for costs

Done –♠Vami _IV†♠ 23:45, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"which had previously been undeveloped" when?

Fixed Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not really seeing the relevance of the sentence beginning "Sinclair was in residence at house..." to the article, unless you can directly connect the teapot dome to the house. Open to being convinced otherwise

The documentation (NYC LPC, NRHP) both made hay about it, and I thought it would add historical flavor to the article. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 01:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The UIA's purchase of the Sinclair House gave the structure a "temporary reprieve"" I think this sentence could be perhaps better phrased to make it clearer what the reprieve is from-- as it stands, the reader is left hanging for a while
- Done Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"part of the Metropolitan Museum Historical District" what is this district? Why was it included?

Added Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"was included on the" -- do we say "included on" or "added to" -- genuinely not sure

Fixed I changed this to "added to". Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems odd to total the amount the UIA had to raise for both of the grants together as they were, presumably, separate grants
- It does, but the source states that both are matching grants. A total of $340K had to be raised separately by the UIA for both grants to have been released (as opposed to one or neither of the grants). Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Feels like it might be more natural to put "architecture" first, but perhaps that's a side effect of repeatedly reading Epic's articles.
Any reception of the building?
- Added Epicgenius (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also I'd appreciate some more eludication on what's going on with the building today: you say the UIA's purchasing was a ""temporary reprieve"" -- is the UIA still in the building? Are they planning to leave? Is it a museum or something? Is it open to the public? Stuff like that
- They are still in the building, but are currently open by appointment only due to the COVID pandemic. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work overall, I've lightly ce'd myself, feel free to rv parts you dislike. Perhaps some more comments to follow, I still have to spotcheck sourcing aswell. Stay tuned. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:52, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have checked some sources, everything lines up. Prepared to AGF on rest. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.