Talk:Starrett City

(Redirected from Talk:Starrett City, Brooklyn)
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Yoninah in topic GA Review

Dead link edit

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--Stwalkerbot 16:31, 10 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Updated Information edit

A lot has happened since 2007, particularly the 2009 preservation transaction. I have updated some information about the property as it now exists, and information about the preservation transaction and its consequences. I am associated with one of the advisers on the transaction. AlexJ7 (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Zero discussing of neighborhood boundaries? edit

Boundaries? Origin of name? Bordering neighborhoods? Seems like basic and essential information for any neighborhood — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.228.246 (talk) 20:04, 19 June 2015 (UTC)Reply

GA Review edit

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 14:44, 11 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


Comments

  • Last para of lead is a single sentence, are there any more facts we could list here, such as number of residents, size of development, cost, etc?
  • Where are area codes sourced?
    • I added a source. It isn't really a big deal, though i understand this may not be common knowledge. Also, 718/347/929 cover the same area.
  • "City[2]) " vs "km2)[3] " ref placement re: parentheses. I imagine the latter is because of the {{convert}} template, but I'd be consistent, and thus move the first one outside the closing parenthesis...
    • Well, in the first instance the reference is inside the parenthesis because it only references the parenthetical portion. In the second instance, the reference covers the preceding phrase both inside and outside the parenthetical portion. epicgenius (talk) 21:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
  • "5-story" -> "five-story".
    • Fixed.
  • "United States.[13][7]" numerical order for refs.
    • Fixed.
  • "Starrett City Cogeneration Facility," shouldn't really part-link formal titles to related articles.
  • "to the cogen facility" unencyclopedic abbreviation here.
    • Fixed both - moved the link to the first instance of "cogeneration" outside the proper name, and expanded the abbreviation.
  • " in 1978[21][10] and" ref order.
    • Fixed.
  • "other recreational facilities.[21][10] " ditto.
    • Fixed.
  • "many World Champion boxers" no need for that capitalisation.
    • Fixed.
  • "was one of the most high-crime areas" -> "had one of the highest crime rates"
    • Fixed.
  • " (on duly only)" duty I guess?
    • Fixed.
  • "on foot, bikes, or in " bicycles.
    • Fixed.
  • Out of interest, what does PS 346, IS 364 (etc) mean?
    • Public school, intermediate school. Equal to primary, secondary schools elsewhere. epicgenius (talk) 21:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Called away, back to complete it soon. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:38, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • "renamed "Starrett at Spring Creek" around 1989.[60] On September 25, 2002, the complex was again renamed Spring Creek Towers" one name in quotes, one not in quotes, any logic?
    • Fixed the second one with quotes.
  • " A.R. Bernard" space between A. and R. these days.
    • Fixed.
  • " property remains affordable" odd tense, remained?
    • Fixed.
  • "President Trump owns" can't we just refer to him by his name?
    • Fixed.
  • We have an article specifically on 2000 United States Census.
  • Do we have any information from the 2010 census?
  • "the median household income was $56,919" what's that compared to the US national average (I tend to find these factoids meaningless without context).
    • Fixed the three above. The new data for 2010 census does not include median household income.
  • "went to minority families.[78][76]" numerical order.
    • Fixed.
  • Interestingly in the racial quota controversy section you have a % "black" but in the previous section you had % "White" (capital W), why the difference? (You also say "62% of apartments were rented to whites" later...)

Called away again.... Will finish soon. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:49, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • "and ethnic profiles.[81][80]" order.
    • Fixed.
  • Wouldn't "Fair Housing Act" be better linked to Civil Rights Act of 1968 rather than a general article on fair housing?
    • Fixed.
  • Several of the See also are already linked in the prose.
  • Avoid SHOUTING in the ref titles.
    • Fixed.

I think that's it for pass number one! Article on hold. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I made a couple of tiny tweaks, but I'm satisfied this meets (easily) the GA criteria, so I'm passing the nomination. Good work. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:50, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
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) 23:17, 24 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

  • ... that after the creation of a private police force in the 1970s, Starrett City went from being one of New York City's most dangerous neighborhoods to one of its safest? Source: NY Magazine; NY Times 1979
    • ALT1:... that to circumvent a racial quota struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, apartments at Starrett City were left vacant instead of being rented to black and Hispanic families? Source: NY Times 1990
    • ALT2:... that Starrett City is said to be the largest federally assisted rental property in the United States? Source: NY Times 2017

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 21:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC).Reply

  •   New enough Good Article. All the hooks are cited and in the article (AGF on the Times archive material). All the hooks are good, though I think ALT0 and ALT1 are probably the most likely to be promoted. QPQ present. Raymie (tc) 18:19, 17 September 2019 (UTC)Reply