Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/New York City/archive5

New York City

Re-nominating this Aritlce. Great Article for a great city. Mercenary2k 01:59, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Old Nomination Comments [1]

• Support- Wow! Amazing article, lots of links, great job. Long, but necessary for a city of that importance. The only thing I saw was there were no references for:

• History section (actually there was one, but only for the last paragraph, unless that one reference covered the entire section
• Culture (The first paragraph)
• Sports section

Other than those errors, I thought that it was very well created, and very informative. Each section was well written with enough information to understand the city well, and it was referenced quite well, except for the above. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hairchrm (talk • contribs) .

• Support The article in question is outstanding. I'm all for nomination. Slicedoranges 00:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Object Per WP:WIAFA 1a. Prose is not compelling, even brilliant. Examples: "...The social change was an earthquake." - Unnecessary. "...Lacking the bureaucratic civic structure of today, the city's infrastructure built as it was an a volunteer network of similar minded individuals collapsed." - Copyedit needed. "The battles in and around New York caused significant damage, which was worsened by a suspicious fire that leveled nearly half of the city" - what is a suspiscous fire?

Per WP:WIAFA 1c. Citations are conspicuously absent from important sections like "History".

Per WP:WIAFA 1d. Neutrality cannot be ascertained unless there is a good number of citations backing the text. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• Object History section really needs some citations. Also, needs a thorough copy-edit. Some random examples:
  • The region was inhabited by the Lenape Native Americans at the time of its European discovery by Italian Giovanni da Verrazzano. What region are we talking about here?
  • This transformation was among the first changes in New York which later spread to other cities and henceforward society in general looked to the city has the cutting edge of change. Huh?
  • New York's colonial heritage was arguably unique in British North America at the time of the Revolution, since New York was the one metropolitan city of note which started as a non-British colony of Dutch heritage. Weaselly
  • Although by the time of the Revolution, with nearly 80% of it's population of English origin, New York City was virtually uniform as a typical British community, it's Dutch commercial inheritance was crucial in making New York the most important city in North America in the 19th Century once the Erie Canal was built. Quite a confusing sentence. Note also "it's".
  • Due to the effects of war and the continual occupation of the city by the British for most of the war, it's population was nearly halved. Another "it's".
  • When General George Washington finally rode in triumph into New York, the city was almost deserted with most of it's upper classes Gzkn 07:49, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Honestly, I looked at this article yesterday and said, "Wow, for an FAC, this is kind of... dirty." That's pretty much the best way I can put it. Also, it obviously needs to cite a bunch of statements. -- Kicking222 15:06, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, where's the sources for history? Hurricanehink (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose The History section in particular needs work, for example:
  • "The region was inhabited by the Lenape Native Americans at the time of its European discovery by Italian Giovanni da Verrazzano." It would be useful to include the date of this event.
  • "Under British rule the City of New York continued to develop, and while there was growing sentiment in the city for greater political independence, the area was decidedly split in its loyalties during the New York Campaign, a series of major early battles during the American Revolutionary War." It would help to include the date of the New York Campaign.
  • "In later years, known as the Gilded Age, the city became the first metropolitan American city to transform [...]" It would help to specify the dates of the Gilded Age, in place of the vague 'in later years.'
  • "Although by the time of the Revolution, with nearly 80% of it's population of English origin, New York City was virtually uniform as a typical British community, it's Dutch commercial inheritance was crucial in making New York the most important city in North America in the 19th Century once the Erie Canal was built." Is there a reference to support the italicised statement?
  • "Furthermore, once Great Britain recognized the United States and abandoned the city, thousands of Loyalists and the thousands more of troops and their families also left." The prose is awkward in this sentence, particularly the italicised part.
  • "When General George Washington finally rode in triumph into New York, the city was almost deserted with most of it's upper classes, including its merchants, traders, bankers, and builders gone when they left with the vast British fleet." It would help to include the date for this event. Also, as mentioned above, "it's upper classes" is incorrect - the whole article needs to be checked for incorrect "it's", there are numerous instances.
  • "From 1800-1840 the city grew in wealth and power and never again would the city have such a substantial stable society of American born citizens." I wouldn't include 'never again' in an encyclopedic article - who knows what will happen in the future.
  • "In it's place was born the modern city of professional police, fire, and other utility services, traffic control, neighborhood development, factories, foundries, and the whole panoply of what came to be known as Gotham." What exactly came to be known as Gotham and when? Also, what was the origin of the term Gotham, and why was it applied here?
  • "Additionally, while immigration spiked and fell between 1842 and 1892, a new wage of immigration began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries which once again transformed the city's demographics." - "wage" -> "wave"
  • "New York overtook London as the most populous city in the world in 1925, ending that city's century-old claim to the title." Is there a reference to support this statement? What was the population of New York in 1925?
  • "New York City's ever accelerating changes and rising crime and poverty rates ended when World War One disrupted trade routes, the Immigration Restriction Acts limited additional immigration after the war [...]" Acts or Act? What was the date(s) of the Act(s)? It would help to include links to the relevant wikipedia articles, e.g. Immigration Act of 1924.
  • Picture Caption: "Lower Manhattan's skyline with the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center" - it would help to include the year of the photograph in the caption. (I've added the year to the caption - Jazriel 11:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC))
  • Good luck with the article. Jazriel 13:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Support New York City should obviously be a featured article. It covers just about everything essential on one of if not the biggest, most diverse, and most important cities in the world. Besides, it already has FA status in both German and French. Being linguistic in the latter, I don't see how the English version is in any way below that version, in fact it is even better, and therefore it seems illogical that it should not be an FA too. Everyone objecting this article is SO PICKY! I don't get how you can complain so much about an article as informative as this. If you look at the site's featured articles, most of them are extremely subpar to this one. Bottem line: NYC is an article of very high caliber. It more than deserves a bronze star. 2Pac 00:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose, so you're saying that because it's featured in other languages it should be featured here as well? Did you read even a portion of the article? Not to worry, I'm a 2pac fan don't think I'm "hatin' on ya". Phoenix2 04:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Importance of subject is not a criterion for Featured Article status. Sockatume 21:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Comment Thanks for the comments. I will fix up the history section and will get proper citations. Been busy with University stuff so havent had much time to fix this up. Mercenary2k 21:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Extra-strong supportAwesome article, five stars! I t has every little detail, and really should have been chosen first time around, but as they say, first time you mess up, try again! -User:District Attorney

Oppose until citations are added and copyedit made. Feel free to strike this once you're done. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 18:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

• Object: Nice article, but needs citations. Heimstern Läufer 21:03, 9 December 2006 (UTC)