Talk:Brooklyn Trust Company Building

Did you know nomination

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 Bruxton (talk) 02:33, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

The Brooklyn Trust Company Building

• ... that some apartments in the Brooklyn Trust Company Building had no windows because of preservation regulations? Source: Chen, Stefanos (April 19, 2019). "Historic Bank Buildings Get a Second Act". The New York Times.
  • ALT1: ... that a former bank vault in the Brooklyn Trust Company Building contains a pet-grooming station? Source: Margolies, Jane (January 22, 2016). "Pet Amenities for New York's Lucky Dogs". The New York Times.
  • ALT2: ... that the Brooklyn Trust Company Building's former bank vault now contains bicycle storage, stroller storage, and a dog spa? Source: Margolies, Jane (January 22, 2016). "Pet Amenities for New York's Lucky Dogs". The New York Times.
  • ALT3: ... that the Brooklyn Trust Company Building was described as one of the "showplaces of Brooklyn" when built? Source: "Brooklyn Trust Company's Magnificent New Home". The Brooklyn Daily Eagle. September 8, 1915. p. 21.
  • ALT4: ... that after buying a clubhouse, the Brooklyn Trust Company was required to replace it with a new building within two years? Source: "Brooklyn Club Not to Lose Identity". The Brooklyn Daily Eagle. November 28, 1913. p. 3.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/MangaDex

Created by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 13:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Brooklyn Trust Company Building; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: - Not done
Overall: @Epicgenius: Good article. waiting on QPQ. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:39, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

@Onegreatjoke: Thanks for the review. I've now done a QPQ. Epicgenius (talk) 18:29, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Approve Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:42, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Epicgenius and Onegreatjoke: The NYT article does not state that the spa and bike and stroller storage is in the vault, it states "the grooming station will be in the old vault off the lobby, across from bike and stroller storage". Bruxton (talk) 01:20, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

@Bruxton: Oops. I have fixed that now. Epicgenius (talk) 02:29, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Attribution issue with images in article

I noticed this article in WP:DYK, but I want to draw attention to the fact that the construction images are uploaded under a faulty attribution. They are claimed as "own work", which is obviously not true since they were taken in the early 20th century. Either they should be swapped with properly attributed images that are of a decent resolution, or deleted wholesale. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Notable feature absent

I'm only a neighbor so I don't have access to the primary sources, but it's curious that the interior decoration isn't really discussed. In particular, there are reliefs or sculptures of naked boys on top of the entrance doors in either side of the main hall. It's surprising that I've never heard of any controversy surrounding them, although in fact it seems quite innocent.

mnewmanqc (talk) 23:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Brooklyn Trust Company Building/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adog (talk · contribs) 12:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Back from New York, and back to review another article! Still a bit tired, but I expect this to be done on Tuesday, August 28 or Wednesday, August 29. Adog (Talk・Cont) 12:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

---

Alright, with the hurricane looming overhead (to our north as of August 28), I am inclined to review this fully today, haha. Knocking on wood, this will be the third "i" storm to his us in some way. You know the drill!

Prose

Lead

• I will ask your opinion on this rather than have this as a suggestion, but how do we feel about inter-wiki linking "annex" to Wiktionary? Can we do that for articles? For non-building experts like myself, this would be a good link to come across. If not, all good.
  • Yeah, that is possible. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
• half century to half-century?
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Site

• The Brooklyn Club occupied the site directly to the north of Taylor's house, on Pierrepont Street;[7][5] Sources flipped for numerical order.
• ... this site had been occupied by the Greenleaf Female Institute in the mid-19th century. might read better as ... the Greenleaf Female Institute had occupied this site in the mid-19th century.
  • Both done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Architecture

• ... and many such structures were being constructed with classical design details. runs a bit awkward. Might I suggest: ... many similar structures ...?
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Montague Street

• At mezzanine level, ... Possible missing word "the" before "mezzanine"
• ... representing when the building was finished. It might be helpful to replace the second "representing" to avoid repetition within this sentence; maybe "denoting" or another synonym?
• Each bay contains a two-over-two sash window, with dark-red marble spandrels between the fourth- and fifth-story windows, as well as balustrades in front of each fourth-story window. might read better as Each bay contains a two-over-two sash window, dark-red marble spandrels between the fourth- and fifth-story windows, and balustrades in front of each fourth-story window.
  • All done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Clinton Street

• In the two outermost bays, the fourth-story window has a balustrade and is topped by a cartouche and a triangular pediment, while the fifth-story window is a simple rectangular window. could be divided into two sentences to highlight the difference between these features. Likely ... triangular pediment. In contrast, the fifth-story ...
• Similar to the suggestion above: Each bay contains a two-over-two sash window, with dark-red marble spandrels between the fourth- and fifth-story windows, as well as balustrades in front of each fourth-story window. might work better as Each bay contains a two-over-two sash window, dark-red marble spandrels between the fourth- and fifth-story windows, and balustrades in front of each fourth-story window.
  • Both done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Pierrepont Street

• ... there are octagonal lanterns attached directly ... might work better as ... octagonal lanterns are attached directly ...
• The first through third stories of the annex are clad with rusticated and vermiculated blocks similarly to the main building, ... "similarly" to "similar"?
  • Both done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Banking hall

• On the eastern wall, the fourth and fifth bays each have a doorway with a wooden door that contains carvings of rosettes; ... might read better as On the eastern wall, the fourth and fifth bays each have a doorway with a wooden door containing rosette carvings; ...
• Possible wikilink for "lozenges" to Lozenge (shape) or Lozenge (heraldry)?
  • Both done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Other lower-story spaces

• The plaster ceiling of each vestibule contains multicolored reliefs, as well as a hexagonal chandelier of bronze and glass that hangs from a medallion at the center of the ceiling might read better as The plaster ceiling of each vestibule contains multicolored reliefs and a hexagonal chandelier of bronze and glass hanging from a medallion at the center of the ceiling.
• Cabinets are built into the walls on the foyer, ... "of" instead of "on"?
• It might be worth noting in the sentence: When the building opened, there was also a "retiring room" ... what the "retiring room" is. I assume it is a break room; an explanation could be in parentheses.
• The basement was originally used by the Brooklyn City Safe Deposit Company. might read better as The Brooklyn City Safe Deposit Company originally used the basement.
• Readers might infer the sentence: According to contemporary media, the vaults were capable of "resisting any known method of attack".[31][32] as belonging to recent sources rather than past sources. I know contemporary has two definitions, one of which matches. Maybe use "contemporaneous" as it is better refined in its definition?
• Within the main bank vault room, the floor consists of light-gray marble ... might work better as The floor of the main bank vault room consists of light-gray marble ...
• The main bank vault, on the northern wall of the room ... to The main bank vault, on the room's northern wall ...?
  • All done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Upper stories

• ... each of which consisted of five pairs of panes. to each consisting of five pairs of panes.?
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
• The walls included sconces as well, and there was a fireplace ... to simply The walls included sconces and a fireplace ...?
  • I worded it like this because only the south wall has a fireplace. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
• ... and one of the apartments contains decorations that were relocated from the building's interior courtyard Might not be too relevant to the building or worthy of inclusion as it is about one apartment in this building. Since this was sourced in 2014, things may have changed and those decorations may not be there anymore.
  • Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
• ... so the residential stories are suspended from trusses on the top story. and many of the apartments have unconventional features. Comma instead of period before "and"?
  • Both done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

History

• ... house, at the corner of Clinton and Montague Streets, ... You may not need a pause during this sentence. If not, comma removal?
  • Removed. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Usage

• Among the building's office tenants was law firm Cullen & Dykman ... Possible missing word "the" before "law".
  • This is an example of a false title, but my feeling is that these are generally okay unless it would cause confusion. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
• Later the same month the LPC approved ... I would add a needed comma pause before "the".
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
• ... and floor plans for the condos were released that August. I assume the developer released the floor plans.
  • That is correct. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Reception

• ... Brooklyn’s bank row." has got a curly apostrophe when straight are used. Also, punctuation outside of quotation?
  • I fixed the apostrophe. Since this is a complete sentence where the period is included in the quote., I have included a period in the quotation here. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

References

• 13, has an emdash and then two dashes for "Commercial, Residential". Possible fix.
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

---

• Thanks for the review Adog. I've fixed all these issues now. Epicgenius (talk) 15:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Additional comments or concerns

• MOS:DUPLINKs for "piano nobile" in subsection "Montague Street", "spandrels" in "Clinton Street", "Breucklyn" in "Pierrepont Street", "Manufacturers Hanover Corporation", "National Register of Historic Places", "Apple Bank Building", "New York City Department of Buildings" in "Usage".

Alright, the read-through and skim-through were good. Spot checks next and rest of review. Adog (Talk・Cont) 05:17, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

• Spot check: "The site covers an area of 13,149 square feet (1,221.6 m2)". Slight differentiation from the source: "Lot Area 13,150 sq ft"?
• Spot check: I believe the statement: "Although the ground-floor banking hall corresponds to the first and second stories of the annex, the New York City Department of Buildings considers the banking hall to be one story" corresponds with page 9 instead of 8, likely with the statement beginning "The New York City Buildings Department classifies the building as five stories ..."

Well written + verifiability

Another well done article by the editor, with good grammar and sentence structure. Nothing much here. The article follows a general manual of style. There is a list of references that are in good order. The article cites a variety of reliable sources, has no issues with original research, and Earwig says you are in the clear. A lot of common names or phrasing are used or highlighted, which is not a problem for copyright/plagiarism/close paraphrasing. Adog (Talk・Cont) 21:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Broadness + focus + neutral

The article is broad in scope, providing reasonable perspectives from many sources. The article is also focused, maybe a minor point above per focus, but otherwise very good. The article is neutral towards its subject, with no outstanding problems. Adog (Talk・Cont) 05:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Images + stability

Two things to note about images, the first being well done on going out there and taking some photographs! They are excellent! This brings me to the second and toned-down bit, images titled Sep. 1914 to May 1915 likely cannot be used because of improper attribution by the uploader. These images are attributed to User:Mightymont when they seem to have been taken during this building's construction in 1914-15 (likely, not this editor's personal collection). Plus, a lot of the images seem to have some pixelated distortion, maybe lifted from somewhere else without proper paperwork. Great images in terms of article illustration, but cannot be used in their current configuration. The article is stable, with no ongoing or active edit conflicts. Adog (Talk・Cont) 05:29, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

• @Epicgenius: At that, the article is looking good. Only some minor problems and honestly more suggestions than corrections. Really, the only problem is the images, which another editor had uploaded and need some sort of correction or omission. Next time I go to NYC, I feel like I will have to visit these buildings you write articles on...Coney Island is on my list which I still have to get around to. Adog (Talk・Cont) 21:50, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the review @Adog. I should be able to address these comments by Thursday. I've removed the construction images but will try to find a source for these.

  Unrelated, but you should definitely visit Coney Island someday. Like much of the rest of NYC, it's a place with so much history, but it's also the only remaining major amusement area in the city. (We used to have over a dozen amusement parks in all five boroughs, but sadly they're been replaced with airports, residential developments, or even highways.) – Epicgenius (talk) 23:33, 29 August 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.