Talk:Andrew Carnegie Mansion/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: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 04:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Review

I came across the article in DYK and I enjoyed it so I want to review. I think we can accomplish the review in the coming days.

Spelling and grammar

Y First story section, cloak room should be one word.

• Done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y First story section, did you mean to say "decorated? "When Carnegie was alive, both rooms were dedicated with awards"

• Maybe (though awards are not usually displayed for decorative purposes). I've changed this to "both rooms displayed awards". Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Third and fourth stories section, "there were also a guest bedroom" -should it be "was"?

• This is part of a longer sentence ("There were also a guest bedroom, a trunk room, multiple bathrooms, and bedrooms for guests' servants"), which makes the use of the word "were" correct in context. In essence, this sentence boils down to "There were also several other rooms [and these rooms were a guest bedroom, a trunk room, multiple bathrooms, and bedrooms for guests' servants]." Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Development section, "Real-estate agent Lawrence B. Elliman" the hyphen appears correct when used this way

Y 1980s and 1990s section, "she had resided for 11 months, then donated $2 million to the museum." Should it read "months, and then"?

• I have done that. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y 1980s and 1990s section, "The work also involved the rearrangement of study areas and storage rooms" should it read "work also involved rearrangement"

• Perhaps, but I think either way is fine. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Reception section "Frick mansions as "largest and most picturesque" should it read "the" largest?

• Yes. I've done that. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Reception section "Carnegie had bought the surrounding lots and resell them only to people who would build similar mansions," should it be "resold"?

• Done as well. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Effects on development section "also built their mansions on the northern section of Fifth Avenue after Carnegie's house was complete." Should it be "completed"?

• Done as well. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Lead

These might be my own failings but I include them here for explanation

Y "it served as the family's residence for nearly half a century" - I have trouble finding the information in the body.

• The body says from 1902 to 1946 (when Louise Carnegie died), which come to think of it is only 44 years. I specified the year. Epicgenius (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Y "then-remote corner of the Upper East Side" I do not see that remote has been cited in the body

• The body says "and one source had called the area "only one remove from goatville"", but I can see why the connection to remoteness is not immediately obvious. I've removed "remote". Epicgenius (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Citations

Y Earwig is 27% and only alerts to titles. i will go through other citations individually

Y Under Site In a spot check of citations I was unable to confirm the 1902 date in this sentence "the mansion was near the north end of Fifth Avenue's Millionaires' Row when it was finished in 1902". (noted in DYK and repeated here)

• I have fixed this. It was an error on my part, as the 1902 date came from further down in the article. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Design and construction section, the sentence "they were the only architects in the city who had not begged for a job" the source says "a" job (noted in DYK and repeated here)

• I have fixed this too. Thanks for taking a look Bruxton. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Site section - citations check out

Y Architecture paragraph checks out - several offline sources

Y Main mansion section citations check out.

Y 9 East 90th Street

Y Mechanical features

Y Interior Offline sources

Y Basements Offline sources

Y First story

Y Second story "in Margaret's former bedroom." Cannot find this in Citation #122

• The source says It's hard not to be enchanted by the second-floor Immersion Room, for example, which used to be the bedroom of Carnegie's daughter. Carnegie only had one daughter, Margaret, and this is mentioned in many sources. Epicgenius (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Y Third and fourth stories - citations check out

Y History

Y Development

Y Land acquisition Spot checked some sources not accessible

Y Design and construction Many paywalls so spot checked

Y Carnegie use citation 185 no mention of Margaret's age (five-year-old Margaret?)

• I have removed Margaret's age. (Her exact birth date in 1897 is mentioned in sources like the NY Times, but I think it would introduce too much complexity to the article. In addition, an earlier section already mentions that Margaret was born in 1897, so mentioning that she's five years old here is probably unnecessary.) Epicgenius (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Y 1900s and 1910s

Y 1920s to 1940s

Y Columbia use

Y Smithsonian use

Y Conversion into museum

Y 1980s and 1990s

Y 2000s to present

Y Reception

Y Effects on development

Y Landmark designations

Y Media citation citation 332 has the incorrect page #. It should be page 201

• I changed it to pages 201-202, where all the relevant text is located. Epicgenius (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Images

Y There are ten images in the article and all relevant to the topic and they appear to have the correct licenses.

Notes

Y A complete article which I have come to expect from EG. The notes section is an example of thoroughness

External links

Y Appropriate links

General comments

Epicgenius Quite an undertaking, 332 references and just short of 10k words. Very minor things to consider above, and then we can move this article to GA. Thank you for your work! I loved the article! Bruxton (talk) 19:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the review Bruxton. I have now fixed these issues. Epicgenius (talk) 20:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Yes
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Yes
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Yes
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes
	2c. it contains no original research.	Yes
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Yes
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes
	7. Overall assessment.	Well done!

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.