Talk:Stuyvesant Farm

Historical Maps

The Manatus map at the full extent makes Bowery No. 1 difficult to find. Zooming into the map with a focus on the current lower Manhattan makes it easier to find, shown below as Option B:

Historical Maps of Bowery No. 1

Option A	Option B	Option C
Bowery No. 1 is marked on the Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft.	{{{annotations}}} Bowery No. 1, marked on the Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft next to No. 16.	{{{annotations}}} Bowery No. 1, marked on the Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft next to No. 16.

I propose updating the article to show Option B. Comments? - DutchTreat (talk) 11:34, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Added Option C with a tigher crop/zoom into the farm and creek - DutchTreat (talk) 11:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, these are great. I like Option C best, as it focuses on the manor house and creek, while still showing the relationship to Fort Amsterdam.--Pharos (talk) 16:14, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I am also enjoying the detail available in Option C. I'll replace the current map with this one. - DutchTreat (talk) 13:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

• Created a cropped image on Commons due to rendering issues with the {{Annotated image}}:

Option D

Option E

1

Manatus map of 1639 under Willem Kieft (North to right) 1 Bowery No. 1    Fort Amsterdam

- DutchTreat (talk) 10:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Article updated with Option E - DutchTreat (talk) 10:33, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Stuyvesant Farm/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 14:41, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• "Peter Stuyvesant's house on the Great Bowery." fragment so no full stop required.
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• "of Peter Stuyvesant, as well" I think it's worth giving a bit of context as to who this individual was, at this point in the lead.
  • Immediately afterward, the sentence says that Stuyvesant was preceded in the position as Director of New Netherland. So either it would be repetitive to say "Director of New Netherland" before Stuyvesant's name, or the sentence needs to be rewritten. This isn't my nomination though. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
    • Good point User:Epicgenius. I rewrote the sentence. Please let me know what you think. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

      I removed a stray semicolon, since these aren't two separate sentences. Otherwise, it looks good. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:57, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

• "namesake of numerous local sites and institutions.[1][2][3]" those references don't need to be in the lead if they are used in the main body of the article in the "Namesakes" section (for example).
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• By "Dutch colonization", do you mean Dutch colonization of the Americas? Is that a suitable link?
  • Done. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• "Dutch colonization ... Dutch colonization..." in consecutive sentences, bit repetitive.
  • Done. Seemed like the meaning could be retain by just removing the second instance. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:10, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• "Manatus map of 1639 ..." font on this looks a bit odd, or am I imagining it?
  • {{overlay}} seems to just have a parameter for title, and it's a bit bigger. We could try to resize it to be more like a regular image caption (does anyone know if <small> would suffice?)... — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:18, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• "came to control Bowery No. 1 when he became" came/became, maybe "took control of"?
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• "Boweries 2- 6 " unspaced en-dash here.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• "director of New Netherland" vs "Director of New Netherland", consistency.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• "company Directors in " don't think this needs to be capitalised.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• "Terms were generous enough..." this sentence is unreferenced.
  • Done. Added new citation here --Wil540 art (talk) 04:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• Several entries in the Timeline are unreferenced, or if they are, they're not inline with some of the sentences.
  • Fixed. --Wil540 art (talk) 04:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• "1776 Ratzer Map" avoid starting sentences/fragments with a numeral, and is "Map" needed to be capitalised?
  • I elaborated on the origin and details of the map. Not sure if it is too much info for caption. --Wil540 art (talk) 03:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• And who/what is "Ratzer"?
  • Bernard Ratzer - I added him to the image caption. --Wil540 art (talk) 03:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• "1793, 1795-99 " en-dash and full year range required.
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• What are "NYCL" and "NRHP"?
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• Last three sentences of Residences section are unreferenced.
  • Done.--Wil540 art (talk) 19:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• "The creeks emptied..." unreferenced.
  • Done.--Wil540 art (talk) 02:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• "The tree stood .. where it stood" repetitive.
  • Done.--Wil540 art (talk) 02:28, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• "founding of Kiehl's at" explain what Kiehl's is.
  • Sufficient to add its full name at the time (Kiehl's Pharmacy)? (Also, I added a ref in support there). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
    • The full name at the time sounds appropriate to me. --Wil540 art (talk) 03:11, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
• "Manhattan Blue Book, 1868" what's that?
  • Added context to this caption. For reference, it's talking about this. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
• ""Stuyvesant pear tree." fragment, no full stop.
  • Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 21:27, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
• "Modern namesakes" these should be inline referenced even if they are linked to Wikipedia articles.
  • Done. --Wil540 art (talk) 02:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

That's all I have. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:58, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for thorough review! The fine folks at WikimediaNYC and I have taken care of nearly everything above. The last unanswered issue is with the font size in the Overlay image which I do not know how to address. It does look slightly bigger to me as well. --Wil540 art (talk) 02:32, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Ideally it can be addressed, but no reason not to promote, which I will now do. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:36, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

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 SL93 (talk) 22:28, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that when England moved to take over the Dutch colony of New Netherland in 1664, a delegation met at Stuyvesant Farm to negotiate the Articles of Surrender? Source: Shorto, Russell (2005-04-12). The Island at the Center of the World. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. p. 304.
  • ALT1:... that with forty slaves on Stuyvesant Farm, Peter Stuyvesant was the second-largest slaveholder in New Netherland, behind only the company that he directed? Source: Burrows, Edwin G.; Wallace, Mike (1998-11-19). Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898. Oxford University Press.
  • ALT2:... that a pear tree on Stuyvesant Farm survived for 200 years, with New York City growing around it, until the tree was felled in a wagon collision? Source: O'Grady, Jim (2003-11-09). "Neighborhood Report: East Village; A New Pear Tree Will Pay Homage to Old New York". The New York Times.
  • ALT3:... that a pear tree on Stuyvesant Farm survived for 200 years until the tree was killed by New York City traffic? Source: O'Grady, Jim (2003-11-09). "Neighborhood Report: East Village; A New Pear Tree Will Pay Homage to Old New York". The New York Times.

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Allen Hutt
• Comment: This is part of a WikiProject New York City collaboration. I tried to name everyone who contributed significantly here. And I'll add more hooks later

Improved to Good Article status by Wil540 art (talk), Pharos (talk), Rhododendrites (talk), and DutchTreat (talk). Nominated by Epicgenius (talk) at 23:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC).

• Article is long enough and new enough. No issues of copyvio or plagiarism. All sources appear reliable. QPQ needs to be done. Hook is interesting to the average reader. A truly excellent article! Thriley (talk) 14:59, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

• @Thriley: Thanks for the review and, on behalf of my colleagues at WPNYC, thanks for the compliment. Everyone did a fantastic job on this article from start to GA promotion. I have done a QPQ now. Epicgenius (talk) 19:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

• With the QPQ done, this nomination is good to go. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:41, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Ratzer map with inset

Created a map with the Stuyvesant Farm highlighted based on Ratzer's Plan of New York (1770). I propose this diagram replace the two annotated images from the same basemap. This one image has some usability benefits by reducing the screen space used in the article and makes zooming to a higher resolution easier.

Insert of "The Plan of the City of New York in North America" map made by British military officer Bernard Ratzer, surveyed in the years 1766 & 1767, printed in 1770.

Comments welcome. - DutchTreat (talk) 10:28, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done Two annotated images of Ratzer map replaced with one merged view. - DutchTreat (talk) 11:42, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Harv error

There's an error with what is currently footnote 27 ( Burrows & Wallace 1999, p. 50); that footnote uses sfn formatting but there isn't a linked bibliography; also there isn't actually a Burrows & Wallace 1999 source listed, it appears to be 1998. Not having the source, I don't want to presume to correct it. Vanamonde (Talk) 02:52, 19 September 2021 (UTC)