This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
A fact from 33 Thomas Street appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 July 2007. The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the windowless skyscraper at 33 Thomas Street(pictured) in New York City was designed to resist nuclear fallout and be self-sufficient for up to two weeks?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Is a building that is essentially a giant wiring hub really notable? --ukexpat 19:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Just think of it as sculpture. My question is, when the castiron facades were preserved, what became of them? --Wetman 19:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I think it's notable as a curiosity... ultra-secure windowless building in the middle of Manhattan? Most people seem to think it's kind of interesting, I got inspired to start the article because of a long thread on Digg's front page about it. At any rate, Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, there's no real policy reason why we can't have an article on this building, it's all well-sourced and goes far beyond directory-style information. Incidentally this would be the tallest building in most states... not even in the top 100 in NYC. I'm not sure what happened to the facades, the source didn't say. --W.marsh 20:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Attempted edits for the other, older switch building address which I know to be on Varick and Canal (since I worked there when it was Nynex) which is also an architectural landmark and may be the same as the one referenced at the Sixth Avenue address, if not it's the one across the street. Lycurgus 20:41, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Far as I can guess, you could mean either 32 Avenue of Americas 32 A/A or the former NY Post printing plant on the east side of Varick Street, across from the police stable and two blocks south of Canal. Jim.henderson (talk) 04:27, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Details about the switches in this building have been removed. The reference supplied does not support the claims made. If sufficient 3rd party sources can be identified to support this information, that's great. Until this, personal knowledge and/or interpretation of the citations beyond what is in the reference itself violates WP:V among many other Wikipedia guidelines and policies.--RadioFan (talk) 13:09, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Just saying. The removed noncontroversial information is correct. Several of us know Wikipedians here know this to be true. It makes sense to leave the information in with a "citation needed" tag.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 33 Thomas Street. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
YAn editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 33 Thomas Street. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Do we really have to have it? I thought Wikipedia did not accept trivia sections and related things. -GoatLordServant (Talk) 16:04, 22 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.