Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Hill-Crest Mansion

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Yoninah (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Hill-Crest

[edit]
(
)
  • ... that Hill-Crest is the most valuable university presidential residence in the United States? Sources: [1], [2]

Created/expanded by LavaBaron (talk). Self-nominated at 20:08, 3 November 2016 (UTC).

Interesting house, on good sources. The hook says "is", the source is from 2013, - can we be sure it still "is"? I coy-edited a bit, and please do some more: please get the first image below the infobox, to not squeeze text, and please find a better header than "design" for a paragraph that lists lake and team. I know "property" as land + building. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:24, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt - thanks for the helpful feedback. I've made these changes; please let me know if I missed anything. LavaBaron (talk) 01:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, and I'll move the image myself. - The question is open if what the most recent source said in 2013 is still true today, or how we can word that we have a 2013 fact? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
Short of sitting for the realtor's exam and then flying to Seattle and personally conducting an inspection and appraisal, I have no way to divine if what was claimed in 2013 is still true today. I think we've done a fairly transparent job of noting it's a 2013 fact, to wit:
  • As of 2013 it was the single most valuable university presidential residence in the United States.
  • Hill-Crest's approximate market value, in 2013, was $8.5 million making it then the single most expensive ...
LavaBaron (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • On mobile just now, but may I suggest that a better hook would be that the current president was 'forced' to live in it, lest the property be forfeited? Ping me tmw if you want me to craft something. EEng 05:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
We're okay, thanks. LavaBaron (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC
Surely you understood the question wasn't directed at you. BTW, an appraiser's license is quite different from a realtor's license. EEng 19:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
The article is clear about it "as of 2013", the hook is not. "is" says it in 2016 or 2017, whenever that may be shown, and there's no source for that. Criticism of DYK being not precise is justified, let's not invite it. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:52, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Got it! My apologies, I misunderstood that the issue was still with the article body. If the body is okay now, I propose for the alternate hook -
ALT-1 - ... that, in 2013, Hill-Crest was appraised as the most valuable university presidential residence in the United States?
- but am open to alternate ones if the past-tense reference is uninteresting. LavaBaron (talk) 17:58, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I like it but would put the date at the end:
ALT2: ... that Hill-Crest was appraised as the most valuable university presidential residence in the United States in 2013?
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks - I agree that's much more readable. LavaBaron (talk) 19:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • The article, and AFAICS the sources, say nothing about appraisals. While I'm here, let me suggest:
ALT3 ... that the University of Washington's president was forced to live in a 1907 mansion with a pipe organ and flooded basement, because otherwise the university would forfeit the house?
ALT4 ... that the University of Washington's president was forced to live in "a candidate for Extreme Makeover: Georgian Mansion Edition" with a flooded basement, because otherwise the house would be forfeit? [3] "completed in 1907... elevator and a pipe organ... parts of the residence could have been a candidate for Extreme Makeover: Georgian Mansion Edition... The basement flooded..." [4] "Regents turned down Mark Emmert's request to [let] him live in his own home... That could have forced a sale of the mansion under the original gift provisions..."
EEng 19:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Better word for appraisal? (not in my vocabulary yet), will look "forfeited". Sometimes they ask me (in German) why I am here ;) - I like ALT3, but find ALT4 too wordy, but perhaps it's just me to whom Extreme Makeover: Georgian Mansion Edition means nothing. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
An appraisal is a formal process, by persons specially qualified, for establishing the value of an asset; just saying something "is valued at $1000" doesn't mean it was appraised, just that a value was asserted somehow. The Georgian reference is to Extreme_Makeover:_Home_Edition. EEng 23:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
  • I prefer Gerda Arendt's hook. Alt-3 isn't accurate enough to withstand a FramTest as the source for the Emmerts living in the house is different than the source mentioning it has a pipe organ so, it's within the realm of quantum physical possibility that a pipe organ was installed after the request to move out was rejected. We just don't know with 100% certainty. For Alt-4, the sources don't say that the house was a candidate for something called Extreme Makeover: Georgian Mansion Edition so we can't use that. LavaBaron (talk) 23:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Since Gerda (a respected editor known for her clueful good judgment) has difficulty with the cultural reference in ALT4, I've struck that hook. As for your objections to ALT3, since you mention Fram I've summoned him/her here for an opinion on your quantum-tunneling time-travel concerns. EEng 23:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
First, thank you for promptly striking the hook to which I objected. Second, no, I mentioned a FramTest, a colloquialism for a stress test of a DYK hook to assess if it would survive a full run on the main page or not, but I did not mention Fram the editor. Anyone can apply a FramTest whether or not Fram him/herself is present to supervise it. But, of course, I welcome Fram's input, as always. (And no one has mentioned time traveling, sheesh. I simply observed the sources don't establish beyond an absolute shadow of a doubt that the pipe organ was present in the house at the time Emmert said he didn't want to live there, which is what your hook demands and which is why it would fail a FramTest.) LavaBaron (talk) 23:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
I didn't strike the hook you objected to – I struck the hook Gerda didn't understand. "Beyond an absolute shadow of a doubt" is not the level of confidence required for hook facts. EEng 00:54, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Waiting for a better word than appraisal in ALT2, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, I didn't realize that's what you wanted. (With some other changes...)
ALT2a: ... that Hill-Crest was said to be the United States' most valuable university presidential residence in 2013?
EEng 09:34, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thank you, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:05, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Does that include ALT3? EEng 13:18, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it does. I like it but guess the other is more for our (all-too-)common readership, - let the prep builder decide. I have a pipe organ pictured in a nom, DYK? (And an article up for deletion.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
ALT2a looks great, endorsed by nom! (Thanks for handling the bookkeeping side of this nom, EEng! I'm a visionary so it's helpful to me when other editors can handle all the minor clerical fixes while dutifully maintaining consistency with my original hook. Appreciate it!) LavaBaron (talk) 23:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Pulled from queue and reopened, as discussed at WT:DYK. Hook doesn't match source. Fram (talk) 10:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I also think that the pulled hook was correct, because it didn't claim that the mansion IS the most ..., only that it was said to be ..., which is true, it's what that source said.. However, I think it would be better if someone else looked at more hooks. My comment: ALT5 is a bit clumsy, and ALT6 too short, - if we don't know what Hill crest is the organ is not unusual. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
If you think that the pulled hook was correct, then please let someone else judge these. If you still don't get the problems after they have been explained, then just don't bother reviewing these. The source only discussed public universities, not all universities, and then only based on who responded, which was less than half of the public universities anyway. Fram (talk) 10:03, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
What did you not understand in "I think it would be better if someone else looked at more hooks." --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
This isn't the only DYK you are reviewing surely? Why would you be unable to see the problem here, after it has been explained, but have no problem at other DYKs? Fram (talk) 10:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
(ec, and let's stay with this one:) Do you understand the difference between "was said to be" (it was said, without pointing out the limits of the survey) and "is"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Do you understand the difference between "most valuable university presidential residence in the United States" and "most valuable PUBLIC university presidential residence in the United States"? Fram (talk) 10:32, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes. But the hook didn't say it is the "most valuable university presidential residence in the United States". (The - lousy, not carefully written ... - source said it is.) - Out of this. Thank you for your digging in the specifics, + I generally try to avoid hooks with a superlative, and regret that I made an exception here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:47, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
No, the source said "Among university-provided homes for public-college leaders, none is worth more than Washington's" (emphasis mine of course). Fram (talk) 11:36, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@LavaBaron: This seems to have stalled. I think an interesting hook could be made out of the forfeiture angle. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Already there -- ALT3. EEng 11:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

ALT3 has had its day. The pipe-organ and flooded basement are no longer in the article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:39, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I added the flooded basement. The pipe-organ's always been there. EEng 12:35, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
No, I think ALT3 won't do, the Emmerts were not forced to live in a house with a flooded basement. A new hook is needed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:49, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
What are you talking about? The source says, "The basement flooded, ruining some of the Emmerts' household possessions." EEng 23:32, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

ALT-∞ : ... that, under the terms of its 1931 bequest to the University of Washington, the university's president is required to reside at Hill-Crest or the property must be sold? http://www.chronicle.com/article/For-Many-Public-College/139187/"It was bequeathed to the university in 1931 by the estate of the Walker-Ames family, timber barons, with the stipulation that the president must reside there or the university would have to sell it."LavaBaron (talk) 19:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Striking ALT3 because the flooding seems to have been a one-off event connected to the plumbing and not a permanent problem. Approving ALT-∞, which is accurate and has inline citations, although I have replaced the word "forfeit" as it implies the University would be deprived of the house without recompense. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:42, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, I unstruck ALT3 because I see nothing offhand in the sources about plumbing, and saying a house "has a flooded basement" doesn't mean there's a permanent swimming pool down there; but if you want we can change it to "a basement that flooded". All the sniping at Talk:DYK seems to have made everyone crazy. EEng 18:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
As there is an approved hook, restriking ALT3 as it has not been approved by a reviewer and had been unstruck by its proposer, who is not allowed to approve it. I have also struck ALT5 and ALT6 as they are not approved either. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Hi, I came by to promote this from the list of "Old approved nominations awaiting promotion", but I find the ALT-∞ hook incredibly bland and un-clickworthy. Frankly, the only thing to make a hook from is the flooded basement. I see it in footnote 2, which blames it on poor renovations. I suggest:
  • ALT7: ... that the University of Washington's president was forced to live in a 1907 mansion with a basement that had flooded, because otherwise the university would have to forfeit the house? Yoninah (talk) 22:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Personally, I would stick with ALT-∞, as perhaps being less interesting than ALT7 but as being more accurate. Without looking up the sources again, which I did extensively earlier on, my understanding is that the basement flooded because of some problem with the plumbing, a one off event. This was used by the new president as a bargaining factor because he would have preferred to live in a regular house rather than a 34 room mansion. If you want to use the flooded basement in the hook, don't include the bit about forfeiting the property. Quite apart from this, the word "Forfeit" can be defined as "lose or be deprived of (property or a right or privilege) as a penalty for wrongdoing". It is thus not suitable to be used in this way in the hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:52, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • OK, I see what you mean. I reread all the sources and see that ALT-∞ is the better hook, though not as showy. Restoring tick for ALT-∞ per your review. Yoninah (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Hill-Crest_Mansion&oldid=945138184"