Talk:United Nations General Assembly Building/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: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 15:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article using the table below. Comments to follow shortly :) Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 15:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Epicgenius, thank you for your work on this great article. A few comments are below, mainly just questions about the sources. If you have any questions for me just give me a shout. Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 23:19, 28 December 2022 (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.	This article is really well-written, as demonstrated by the checks below: Lead Y Site Y Architecture Y Form and facade Y Interior Y Lobbies Y General Assembly Hall Y Rostrum Y Delegates' seats Y Other spaces Y History Development Y Planning Y Construction Y Opening and early years Y UN expansion Y Renovation and 21st century Y Critical reception Y
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead Y Layout Y Words to watch None identified. Y Fiction N/A List incorporation N/A
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.	Sources are cited in the appropriate place and are attributed.
	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).	Source check I have conducted this source check by selecting sources with a large number of citations, and spot-checking others. Only checked sources I am able to access. All are listed below. Progressive Architecture 1950 The General Assembly Building occupies the center of the United Nations site, stretching roughly between 44th Street to the south and 45th Street to the north. I can't see mention of 44th and 45th in the source. Might just be my lack of knowledge about New York–would this location make sense if you knew about the other locations detailed in the source? Correct. Admittedly, it would make more sense if one were to look at a map (there is a map at the bottom of page 60, which places the building between "44th" and "45th"). Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) there were initially 34 booths in total. Can't find this on p.67 of the source. Oops, I used the wrong source. I have fixed this now. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) the building had to accommodate 800 delegates (80 nations with 10 delegates each) The source says five delegates and five advisors, not 10 delegates. Not sure if they're the same thing? I meant "diplomats". Thanks for the catch. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) Architectural Forum 1950 There is a delegates' lounge on the south side of the second floor, which also connects with the Conference Building. I think the reference to the lounge appears on the illustration on p.98. Should the citation be changed to pp.98-99 for clarity? Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) Stern, Mellins & Fishman 1995 Y UN Directory Y Life 1952 Life magazine characterized the building as having a "clifflike front of marble and glass" along with "pinch-waisted walls" I think the quote is on p.114, not p.113. Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) United Nations. General Assembly The ceiling of the hall lacks decorative finishes and contains recessed lighting. Are you getting this information from the photos in the source? I think it may actually be from the other source (Architectural Forum 1952, p. 147), but I have to check in a little bit. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) Yep, it was from that source. Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC) Adlerstein 2015 The pages numbers for refs [89], [103] and [175] don't match the page numbers used in the source. Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) White, Norval; Willensky, Elliot; Leadon, Fran (2010) Outside of the UN headquarters, Trump World Tower and the Japan Society are to the northwest, and the Millennium Hilton New York One UN Plaza hotel is to the southwest. I think details about Trump World Tower and the Japan Society are on p.344, not p.343. Fixed. I forgot to update the page numbers when I copied this reference from another page. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC) Gray, Christopher (April 25, 2010) Y Time. May 29, 1950 Y United Nations Gifts. October 8, 1954 The dimensions of the tapestry as stated in the article do not match the dimensions stated by the source. Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC) "Fact Sheet: United Nations Headquarters". United Nations. November 18, 2010 a seating capacity of 1,800. At 165 ft (50 m) long and 115 ft (35 m) wide, it is the largest room in the complex. I don't think the source supports this statement. I have swapped out the source. Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC) Each of the 193 delegations has six seats in the hall with three at a desk and three alternate seats behind them. Not sure where the 193 number comes from, nor the seating info. I removed the 193 number and found a source for the fact that each delegation has six seats. Unfortunately, I don't know where the 3 at a desk/3 alternates info came from Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC) "Mural, East Wall (Scrambled Eggs)". United Nations Gifts. December 31, 1952 Cannot see that the source supports detail in the article regarding that they were donated by Malawi government. Removed. It seems to be directly contradicting a claim elsewhere in the same section, saying that the murals were anonymously donated. In addition, the source for this sentence says that the murals were anonymously donated. Epicgenius (talk) 03:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC) Interestingly, the archived version mentions the nickname of the mural "Bugs Bunny", but the current version doesn't. The archived source states President Harry Truman referred to one as "Scrambled eggs" [East Wall] and the other has been thought to resemble "Bugs Bunny"[West Wall]", which to me, doesn't necessarily suggest that Truman nicknamed the East Wall mural Bugs Bunny. I have edited the sentence to clarify that Truman merely called the murals by these names. Epicgenius (talk) 03:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC) Wren, Christopher S. (October 24, 1999). Y Sengupta, Somini (September 24, 2014). Y Further source check I'm going to do a few more spot checks of sources where there are only one or two citations. Kelsen, H.; London Institute of World Affairs (2000) Y National Register of Historic Places, National Park Service. July 21, 1983. Y MacFarquhar, Neil (November 22, 2008). Y "Poseidon of Artemission". United Nations Gifts. December 31, 1953. Y "The General Assembly". United Nations. March 19, 2011 Y Binlot, Ann (August 26, 2014) Y Yang, Andrew (February 1, 2005) Minor point, but the source says the carpets are cream but the article says gray. I have fixed this now. Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC) Architectural Record. Vol. 110. March 1947 Y United Nations Gifts. October 30, 1961 Y UPI. September 17, 2014 Y
	2c. it contains no original research.	From reading sources and conducting spot-checks, I am content that there has been no OR.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Spot-checks have indicated no evidence of copyvio. Copyvio detector brings up nothing of concern.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Happy that there is coverage of all key aspects.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article is thorough but does not stray off topic.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is presented neutrally.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Majority of recent edits are by nominator and are constructive. Vandalism has been dealt with. Article is currently stable.
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.	Images are tagged with copyright status. No fair use images. Not a requirement for GA, but all images need alt descriptions.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are appropriate for article and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

@Unexpectedlydian: Thanks for the review. I think I've now addressed all the points you've brought up. Epicgenius (talk) 22:53, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

That's great - well done! Passing now Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 23:25, 3 January 2023 (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.