This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to the45 East 66th Street article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
A fact from45 East 66th Street appeared on Wikipedia'sMain Page in theDid you know column on 3 November 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the tenants ofa New York City apartment building protested against its owner by going to a racetrack and betting on his horse?
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofArchitecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofNew York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S.historic sites listed on theNational Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofhistoric sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites
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 asthis nomination's talk page,the article's talk page orWikipedia 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.
Article is new and long enough, neutral, sourced,copyvio-free, and presentable. The hooks are cited to a reliable source and are interesting, I'd prefer ALT0. Images are properly licensed. QPQ done. Looks ready to me.Vacant0(talk •contribs)12:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
" and the apartments were subdivided" all of them? I might say "some other apartments" if not
Most of them were subdivided between 1948 and 1953, but I can't say for certain whether all of them were divided. I changed this to "most of the apartments".Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sentence about the praise for the facade feels tacked on to the end of the paragraph after we've moved away from the facade
If Raynes converted it into a co-op in 1985, how did Classic Properties sponsor the co-op conversion after 1990?
Basically, Classic took over ownership of the co-op apartments that had not been sold yet. In NYC, any co-op units that haven't been sold after the conversion are sometimes known assponsor unit - the developer/investor continues to own the unit, thus "sponsoring" it. I've reworded this to make it a bit clearer.Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need the building measurements in foot down to the decimal?
"It contains ... top stories." suggest blending these two sentences to make it less choppy. Maybe "French Gothic decorative details are spread across the entire facade, unlike in other buildings built in New York City before World War I, where the decorations were typically confined to the bottom and top stories."?
"The original plans for the building called for 41 apartments...Initially, the building had 20 apartments" Do we know why it was cut down? Even if we don't know the reason, can we at least acknowledge the discrepancy with a "however" or something, because right now it's jarring
I have no idea. I assume this was because they wanted smaller apartments at first, but then chose to include larger apartments instead. When the building was completed, each floor had only two apartments, but the developers could've fit twice as many apartments if they subdivided the floors even more.Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Two successive sentences here start with "each of the apartments"
"The structure soon went into foreclosure" do we know why?
Unfortunately, I didn't see the reason for this in the source (which says only that "Rogers lost his 66th Street building in a foreclosure in 1912").Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aside from the elevator operator mentioned later, do we know which employees were dismissed, and why their dismissal made the building feel unsafe? (Okay, going on a bit farther, I see one was a doorman, but why not list them all together?)
Looking at the sources, I couldn't figure out who the third person was, but I did combine the mention of the elevator operator and the doorman. The sources also don't mention why the residents felt unsafe, though I should say that it is unusual to see an apartment building on the Upper East Side without a doorman, so make of that what you may. I'll try to look for sources that address either of these issues.Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This whole fight about the unnecessary elevator operator is killing me. To be so rich that pushing an elevator button feels like too much work!
Yeah... apartment buildings in NYC really are something. I've been to public-housing developments with broken elevators and no doormen, and I've been to luxury apartment towers where they won't let you in if you don't tell them which resident you're there to see.Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I'm just not getting the whole co-op conversion process, or maybe there's still mucus in my brain. It takes years? There are sponsors?
Yeah, in general it takes developers several years to sell all the apartments in an NYC apartment building, even if it's a brand-new building. It isn't limited to co-ops; condos have this issue as well. Even for rental apartment buildings, it might take months or years to rent out all the apartments in a brand-new building. As for sponsors, these are just the developers/owners of the co-op units that haven't been resold (like I mentioned above).Epicgenius (talk)17:36, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"When the building was..." sentence has "the building" twice, can we write around it?
Thanks for providing that source explaining sponsor units, that makes more sense now. (I wonder if we shouldn't have an article about that?) Anyway. The other prose fixes look good, no concerns there. As for the rest:
Images are all freely licensed, spot checks of major sources (mainly the landmarks commission reports and Alpern) turned up no significant errors or discrepancies. I think we're good to go here. ♠PMC♠(talk)23:08, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Article is new and long enough, neutral, sourced,copyvio-free, and presentable. The hooks are cited to a reliable source and are interesting, I'd prefer ALT0. Images are properly licensed. QPQ done. Looks ready to me.Vacant0(talk •contribs)12:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking up the review, though. –Epicgenius (talk)17:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
