Wikipedia

Talk:Therapy (New York City)/Archive 1

< Talk:Therapy (New York City)
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Another Believer in topic DYK?
Archive 1

Sources

Latest comment: 4 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

---Another Believer (Talk) 22:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Armadillopteryxtalk 23:03, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, Thanks for expanding the article! OK if I archive this section since the sources have been added? ---Another Believer (Talk) 04:34, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
@Another Believer: Sure, go for it! Armadillopteryxtalk 04:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Image?

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion
  Resolved

Anyone able to snap a photo of the building's exterior? ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:25, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to User:Jim.henderson, this article is now illustrated. There's File:Therapy Bar 348 W52 (1) jeh.jpg as well. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Sources to add

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

GA?

Latest comment: 3 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

@Another Believer: I think we could co-nominate this for GA. What do you think? Armadillopteryx 18:17, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, You've done more of the heavy lifting but I'm happy to be a co-nom if you prefer! ---Another Believer (Talk) 22:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
@Another Believer: I'm fine either way, but you started the article, and about 45% of its current length was all you (it was about 7,000 bytes before my first edit; now it's about 16,000). I think a co-nom would be fair! Armadillopteryx 01:29, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
Armadillopteryx, Fire away! ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:55, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Another Believer: I'll try to do it correctly this time, lest I make poor Legobot put the article on review 300 times again. Armadillopteryx 02:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

@Another Believer: Doesn't the citation template documentation say that the publisher field is not normally used for periodicals (such as AMNY and Time Out, whose publishers you just added) but that it is standard for websites (such as Thrillist, whose publisher you just removed)? Armadillopteryx 02:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, I usually go into GAN with publisher fields added for most but the most obvious sources (The New York Times, etc). Feel free to remove whatever you think is best... we can always add back if the reviewer requests. I only removed the Thrillist publisher which is a duplicate (the first use of Thrillist in the Ref section still has the publisher defined). ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:21, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
@Another Believer: I actually stopped adding publishers for periodicals once you told me to leave them out of this specific article   At very least, Time Out's publisher (Time Out Group) needs to be omitted, as the template documentation says, Omit where the publisher's name is substantially the same as the name of the work. Armadillopteryx 02:25, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

Latest comment: 3 years ago38 comments3 people in discussion

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.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Therapy (New York City)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 17:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Starting this review now -- RoySmith (talk) 17:10, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:23, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi RoySmith, and thanks for taking this on! I will go through the article now. Armadillopteryx 18:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Oh ... Another Believer, let me know when you're done so we don't have edit conflicts. Armadillopteryx 18:03, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Armadillopteryx, Sure! I just knocked a few off the list, but please go ahead and feel free to do a first pass as you see fit. I'm at work and won't be editing for a few hours. Thanks for coordinating! --Another Believer (Talk) 18:04, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Another Believer, of course! I'm actually also at work but seem to have some downtime, haha. Armadillopteryx 18:08, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Most of these are just suggestions. Feel free to push back on any that don't make sense to you.

  • "bilevel gay bar", unless bilevel is a double-entendre, I think "two story" would work better.
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • link "drag show" the first time it's used.
  • "Prior to its closure in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it hosted frequent drag shows", well, it didn't host them after it closed, so just start the sentence with, "It hosted frequent...". Break out the rest as another sentence: "It closed in March...", or maybe, "It went out of business in March..."
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "off-duty Broadway actors", leave off the "off-duty". Surely they weren't frequenting the bar while performing on stage, so obviously they were off-duty. In any case, "off-duty" makes me think of policeman, fireman, etc. It seems like an odd way to describe an actor who's not on stage at the moment.
  • "sometimes participated in that evening's show", they weren't participating in some other evening's show, so just "sometimes participated in shows" is enough.
    Reworded in a different way while rewriting for the change above. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "stated that it was unlikely to reopen", either "stated that he was unlikely to reopen", or "state that the club was unlikely to reopen" works better.
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "Therapy was situated on" -> "Therapy was on", or maybe "Therapy was located on"?
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "It faced Industry, another gay nightclub located directly across the street". As I read the first two words, I expected, "It faced financial trouble", or "it faced community opposition", or something like that and then it was a surprise when the sentence went in another direction. How about, "It was directly across the street from another gay nightclub, Industry."
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "its interior was characterized by" -> "its interior had", or even just, "it had", since this the description is obviously not of the exterior. Or, if you prefer, "Time Out New York characterized its interior as..."
    I guess I don't mind making a change here, but the alternatives proposed strike me as disimprovements. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "As of mid-2019", the "as of" qualifier usually implies something that's true now, but might not be true in the future. Given that they're closed, that doesn't really make sense here. It might be OK, but maybe there's a better way to phrase that. Your call.
    "As of" is true in the time frame that follows the phrase; there's no implication that it is the present. I used "as of" here because the show schedule can change over time, so we don't know if this claim was still true through the end of the club's operation. Armadillopteryx 18:22, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "Of Stage Fright, the Monday-night drag show..." break this up into two sentences. Something like, "Stage Fright was a regular monday-night drag show hosted by Gould Cummings. Melissa Kravitz Hoeffner of Thrillist wrote of it, ...."
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "Therapy closed temporarily in 2019 due to structural issues", make this start a new paragraph, the second sentence of which will be, "It reopened (whatever amount of time later) when (whatever was complete)". This sets up the logical flow of "it closed, it reopened, it closed again"
    Unfortunately, the sources don't indicate when exactly it reopened. Could probably pull that info from WP:PRIMARY sources (i.e. the club's social media), though. Would that be fine? Armadillopteryx 18:28, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
    I have no problem with the occasional primary source to support a factual statement like this. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:36, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
    Okay! I will go digging. Armadillopteryx 18:41, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
    Found this source. Need to step away from the computer for a bit, but will update later. Armadillopteryx 18:52, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
    This is now done. Armadillopteryx 22:20, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • "which required demolition", clarify that it was the adjacent building that was demolished, not the one Therapy occupied.
      Done. Armadillopteryx 18:29, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
PS, https://www.gaycitynews.com/therapy-temporarily-closes/ says "partially demolished".
That's how I phrased it, too. Armadillopteryx 18:40, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

That's my first pass, I'll save this for the moment.

Thank you for the review so far! Armadillopteryx 18:30, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
  • The images all look appropriately licensed. I'm not an expert on fair use, but I'm taking it on faith that the logo is appropriately low-res to fit our requirements.

That does it for me. Please ping me when you've worked through all your revisions. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

Another thought, maybe bump "COVID-19 pandemic and closure" up to a level-2 heading like all the others. I suppose it's technically a part of the history, but I think it would read better will all the headings at the same level. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
RoySmith, I don't feel super strongly about this, but from a logical standpoint, I think it is appropriate to keep it as a level-3 header since it is indeed part of the club's history. I could live with changing it if you do find it important. I wonder what Another Believer thinks. Armadillopteryx 22:20, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
It was just an idea, I'm OK either way. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:44, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
RoySmith, I'd prefer to leave as subsection of History. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:58, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
@RoySmith: I believe we're finished with the revisions. Anything else you'd like done? Armadillopteryx 05:11, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm good, I've marked this as passing GA. Good job, guys. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
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.

DYK?

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@Another Believer: Mind if if DYK this? Armadillopteryx 15:45, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Armadillopteryx, Go for it! Thanks, ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Therapy_(New_York_City)/Archive_1&oldid=1033276030"