Wikipedia

Template:Did you know nominations/Essex on the Park

< Template:Did you know nominations
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 Yoninah (talk) 23:59, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Essex on the Park

(
)
Essex on the Park and Hotel Essex
Essex on the Park and Hotel Essex
  • ... that Essex on the Park (pictured) was built on a pre-existing ground lease that runs until 2057?

Created by TonyTheTiger (talk). Self-nominated at 15:35, 15 July 2019 (UTC).

  • A new hook is probably needed, the current one honestly is pretty bland. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:02, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
@TonyTheTiger: If that's the case, then if it's okay for you, then this nomination should probably be marked as unsuccessful. Not all articles are meant to be for DYK unfortunately. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:01, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Suggesting a couple of alts. Spokoyni (talk) 08:57, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  • ALT1 ... that the 57-story Essex on the Park (pictured) was built on a former swimming pool?
  • ALT2 ... that Essex on the Park (pictured) was initially planned to be 48 stories tall, though at its completion it stood 57 stories tall?
  • ALT3 ... that Essex on the Park (pictured) was initially planned to be 48 stories tall, increasing to 56 stories when construction started, and at its completion stood 57 stories tall?
ALT1 sounds good to me. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:31, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
I'm fine with 1.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:54, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
  • A review is still needed for this. If no one else does it within the next few days I'll do it. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:28, 3 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Article meets newness and length requirements, no close paraphrasing was found, and a QPQ has been found. All hooks except for ALT1 have been struck as lacking interest to broad audiences, and also per the nominator's agreement. There are two minor issues that need to be addressed: while the hook says that the hotel was built on the site of the swimming pool, the article and source only said that the building was planned to be built on that site. The wording in the article needs to be made more explicit that the swimming pool site pushed through. In addition, there's currently a stub template in the article, which needs to be removed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:20, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Hi @Narutolovehinata5: I have removed the stub template, as it clearly isn't any more.  Done
I have also edited the text a little. I hope it is clearer that both the original plan and the modified plan which was built, were/are next to the original Essex Inn on the site of its former carpark and swimming pool. That is certainly how I read the two sources from 2015 (the original plan) and 2017 (the modified plan).  Done
I hope this helps. RebeccaGreen (talk) 19:15, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, should be good to go now. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Has a QPQ been done? Yoninah (talk) 20:02, 29 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Now that a QPQ has been done I'm restoring the tick; I apologize for missing the missing QPQ in the previous QPQ, it seemed to have missed my mind at the time. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:15, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
  • The QPQ involved is very far from being complete, and this should not be approved until all of the DYK criteria have been checked for at least one of the articles being reviewed. So far, only newness and length have been checked, and a query made about page numbers in a source. In my experience, TonyTheTiger has been reviewing in small, incremental steps, and it can take quite some time before all the criteria have been checked and a review icon posted. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: Since this nomination has been ongoing for months now and it seems a complete QPQ is the only thing that's missing, would it be okay with you if I donate a QPQ if Tony isn't able to finish one soon? He did leave comments there two days ago so it's still ongoing, but I guess this is just a backup option. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:10, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Narutolovehinata5, it's entirely up to you whether you want to donate a QPQ on Tony's behalf. It's very generous of you to think of doing so. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:15, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. For now I'll wait for Tony to finish his review as it's still ongoing, but will be willing to donate a QPQ if that isn't done soon. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:55, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: I see that the Lake review is still ongoing, and it appears he was waiting for a reply from that discussion's nominator. I'll leave him a talkpage message asking for his permission for me to donate a QPQ here in his stead, considering that nomination has been taking a while to finish. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:23, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
It's your choice, Narutolovehinata5. As I noted there, the review could easily continue without that bit of information. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
@BlueMoonset: Thanks. I will be donating my QPQ of Template:Did you know nominations/Maria Grapini, though Tony is of course free to continue his Lake review. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:51, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Essex_on_the_Park&oldid=917249447"