Talk:Gage and Tollner

Was this joint good?

Man, I be eatin at old restauarants all the time! And I keep notes on if they food is good. This restaurant be really old and I want to know if the food is good. I cain't put nothin in the wiki cause i aint eat therre, but if some one has been they can put it on they blog and we can link to it good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.138.33 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 4 May 2011

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) 14:06, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Gage and Tollner

• ... that Gage and Tollner was New York City's only chop house to survive Prohibition? Source: "Last of Fashionable Chop-Houses Celebrates 50th Anniversary". Times Union. November 10, 1929. p. 6
  • ALT1: ... that the Gage and Tollner restaurant was New York City's first interior landmark within a commercial building? Source: "Food Talk". Newsday. October 17, 1997. p. 151.
  • ALT2: ... that the Gage and Tollner restaurant, which first opened in 1879, reopened in 2021 after a crowdfunding campaign? Source: Miller, Stuart (August 19, 2019). "Restaurants Find New Way to Eat: Getting Fed With Regulated Crowdfunding". Crain's New York Business. Vol. 35, no. 33–34. p. 3; Duggan, Kevin (April 16, 2021). "Classic chophouse Gage & Tollner finally opens in Downtown Brooklyn". Brooklyn Paper
  • ALT3: ... that the Gage and Tollner restaurant used to close from June to September because of oyster shortages? Source: "Tollner Reveals Secret of Success as Restaurateur". The Brooklyn Daily Eagle. January 18, 1925. p. 31.
  • ALT4: ... that Gage and Tollner's main dining room (pictured) was intended to resemble the interior of a railcar? Source: Shelby, Joyce (February 13, 2004). "Landmark Eatery to Reopen in New Locale". New York Daily News. p. 59.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Dunning–Kruger effect
  • Comment: I need to come up with more hooks later. I am not done with this expansion, but I accidentally realized that the article is eligible for DYK.

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 22:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Gage and Tollner; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• Starting review. Zeete (talk) 11:19, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Expanded 5x, from 6,296 on 8/15/23 to 35,146 on 8/21/23 (per double DYK check), also undergoing GA review, well cited, neutral, Earwig reported violation possible, 43.5%, for one source (long quotes), but unlikely for other sources, QPQ done, hooks interesting, cited, length checked ok. I prefer ALT4, it fits the picture, classic railroad dining car. (I added pictured to the hook.)
• Good to go! Thanks, Zeete (talk) 12:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
• I've unpromoted this due to concerns over the quality of the image, per WT:DYK#Gage and Tollner. It can get re-promoted if a better quality image can be located, or perhaps run without an image. RoySmith (talk) 17:30, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Sadly, I think our options at this point are running an old image of the exterior, or a slightly less old image from when the restaurant was closed. Given this, I think it's best to just run this one without any image. Epicgenius (talk) 19:11, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
    • Personally, I like ALT3, although I'd trim it a little:
      • ALT3a: ... that Gage and Tollner used to close from June to September because of oyster shortages?
        • ALT3a is fine with me as well. Epicgenius (talk) 21:54, 2 September 2023 (UTC)

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 transcluded from Talk:Gage and Tollner/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 17:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

• I am happy to begin reviewing this article. Bruxton (talk) 17:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Lead

• The lead summarizes all of the main points in the article. It is three paragraphs long and the article is 6490 words. All of the information in the lead is covered in the article. Bruxton (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Infobox

• The infobox provides all significant items related to the information in the article. There is a map and NRHP information. Bruxton (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Images

• The United States has Freedom of Panorama for buildings and public interiors so the images are free. They are also relevant and interesting. It looks like @Rhododendrites: ate the beautiful Baked Alaska at Gage and Tollner. the picture is wonderful. Bruxton (talk) 19:48, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

Early years

• This is a great section with much information including the price of a meal in 1900. Women were banned from smoking is an interesting pre-suffrage tidbit.
• Consider adding information about this: One of the restaurant's co-owners, Marcus J. Ingalls, died there in February 1911 so that the reader's curiosity is satisfied. Like how he died? or? Bruxton (talk) 20:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done pinging @Epicgenius: to the nomination before final checks. Might be one item above this post that needs attention.

Ownership and use

• The references check out. The sections are detailed and accurate. The sources are all reliable. Great detail and I like the part about the milk crate discovery.

Cuisine and clientele

• Such a thorough and surprising part of the article. We also learn here that it was named as being one of the world’s best seafood restaurants, with a reference. Bruxton (talk) 01:06, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

References

• The article has 232 references. Earwig only alerts to properly attributed quotes. The sources are high quality. I have spot checked many of the references and found that the nominator has been thorough and has properly interpreted the sources without WP:CLOP. Bruxton (talk) 01:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Review Chart

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.	Pending

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.