Talk:Grand Prospect Hall

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Grand Prospect Hall

• ... that New York City's Grand Prospect Hall caught fire a few weeks after it opened on the site of a previous hall that was destroyed in a fire? Source: "Girl Unconscious in Burning Building". Times Union. February 21, 1903. p. 4.
  • ALT1:... that New York City's Grand Prospect Hall was destroyed in a fire and rebuilt, only to caught fire a few weeks after it opened? Source: "Girl Unconscious in Burning Building". Times Union. February 21, 1903. p. 4.
  • ALT2:... that the owners of New York City's Grand Prospect Hall produced and starring in cheaply shot commercials, parodied on Jimmy Kimmel Live! and Saturday Night Live? Source: Wong, Ashley (August 26, 2021). "The Dream May Be Over for the Grand Prospect Hall". The New York Times.
  • ALT3:... that cheaply produced commercials for New York City's Grand Prospect Hall, with the tagline "We make your dreams come true!", gained the hall's owners some local celebrity? Source: Cunningham, Jennifer; Fanelli, James (January 13, 2011). "Grand Prospect Hall's penchant for cheesy ads pays off for owners raking in the dough".
  • ALT4:... that New York City's 117-year-old Grand Prospect Hall, once known for its low-budget commercials, was rejected for historic-landmark status because it was changed too much? Source: City Won’t Landmark Brooklyn’s Grand Prospect Hall

• Reviewed: Natsuko Takahashi
• Comment: This is an ongoing WikiProject New York City collaboration, so I'm pretty sure some more info and hooks might be added later. I also might have missed some people who expanded the article, for which I apologize in advance.

5x expanded by Wil540 art (talk), Rhododendrites (talk), and Epicgenius (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 12:41, 16 September 2021 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Alt 1 is the most concise, although the editors have regrettably failed to notice the excitement of an AN EEL BEING STUCK IN THE HOSE preventing the firefighters from putting the fire out. No Swan So Fine (talk) 16:27, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

• @No Swan So Fine and EpicGenius: I'm happy to run ALT1, but I'm with No Swan So Fine on this one–running an eel hook as the quirky would be both delightful and hookier than ALT1. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:29, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
• oops, @Epicgenius theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 06:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

• @No Swan So Fine and Theleekycauldron: Ah. I added the eel bit before seeing this. But also changed it to reflect that it was the house next door (the owner's family's house) and not Prospect Hall which caught on fire [that time]. An irresistible detail for the article, but IMO feels like too much of a tangent for the DYK (did you know that firefighters had trouble putting out a fire next door because of an eel in the hose?). PS: the most interesting question to me is that if, as the source says, a "very large" eel clogged the hose.... how many smaller eels were just being shot out at fires all the time? — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:26, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
• Ah! And I just realized the main hook and ALT1 aren't quite inaccurate for this reason. I guess my weak preference would be for ALT2. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Theleekycauldron, Rhododendrites, and No Swan So Fine: Yeah, reading the reference again, it does say the house next door burned and that the eel was clogging the fire hose. I think ALT2 would work better in that case. ALT1, while concise, would not be concise any longer if we mentioned that it was, in fact, the house next door that couldn't be extinguished with an eel in the hose. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

• oof. ALT2 it is, although i'm mildly disappointed that reality is resisting black humour. I'll promote in a few. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 21:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

ALT2 to T:DYK/P2 without image

infobox image

For the infobox image, I created an alternate version with some lens correction. I propose replacing this derivation for the original in the infobox. Any concerns or alternate suggestions?

• Original
  Original
• 
  Lens and perspective correction

- DutchTreat (talk) 12:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, DutchTreat. Looking at this again, the new one seems like it has some distortion and may be leaning to the right a bit. See, for example, the angle of the left edge and the angle of the right edge. That, combined with the difference in composition (with the building to the left/right, as well as the street in front, cropped out), leads me to a weak preference for the original here. It might be possible to take another pass on it to correct the perspective, but the trade-off is tough. Curious what others think. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:39, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree there is horizontal distortion, Rhododendrites. Didn't make an attempt to correct for that. I'll make another pass at it over the next week or so. Waiting to hear from others on overall composition especially related to adjacent buildings. Thank you for the feedback! - DutchTreat (talk) 09:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Nice work DutchTreat. I think the new one looks a bit better but does need a slight horizon line tweak. Good eye Rhododendrites, the Grand Prospect Hall is leaning slightly in the corrected image. My other note is the new image could have slightly less sky and slightly more curb. I think you could include the whole planter and curb if possible. --Wil540 art (talk) 20:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Wil540 art I will include more area on the left, right and foreground in my next iteration. My target is to work on this next week. I can ping you both when there is a version ready for review. Once again, I appreciate getting this feedback. Cheers - DutchTreat (talk) 22:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wil540 art, Rhododendrites Uploaded a new revision of the image. Corrected the horizontal distortion of the building. The street at the bottom is still slanted which is distracting. Expanded the frame to include surrounding areas on the left and the right. Due to the distortion in the original image, parts of the lower left and right were manufactured with my brush. How does this revision compare to the original? - DutchTreat (talk) 12:06, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Looks like a new infobox image to me. Thanks for working on it! — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:27, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Very nicely done DutchTreat! Much improved. The slanted street is not distracting to me. The road has a slight slant in person. Looks like a new infobox image to me too! --Wil540 art (talk) 16:08, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Rhododendrites and Wil540 art I appreciate the feedback and support! - DutchTreat (talk) 11:09, 31 October 2021 (UTC)