Template:Did you know nominations/Guild House (Philadelphia)
- The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 11:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Guild House (Philadelphia) edit
- ... that Guild House (pictured), a residential building located in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was the first major work by Robert Venturi?
Created/expanded by Camerafiend (talk). Nominated by LlamaAl (talk) at 23:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- REVIEW COMPLETED - The following has been checked in this review by Maile66
- QPQ not necessary - not a self-nom
- Article created by Camerafiend on October 29, 2012 and has 3,054 characters of readable prose
- NPOV, well sourced
- Hook image is the work of Smallbones and licensed on Commons under Public Domain
- Original hook is interesting, short enough at 134 characters, and sourced at the end of the sentence
- Every paragraph sourced
- Duplication Detector run, no copyvio found
GOOD 2 GO , if original hook is used to promote to the main page
Because I also feel the article contains an interesting fact in that the building was commissioned by the Quaker organization Friends Neighborhood Guild, I would like to propose an alternative hook here. The nominator is on a one-month block, so I'm going to notify the article's author to weigh in on this alternative hook. — Maile (talk) 18:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
- Alt1 ... that architect Robert Venturi's first major work, Guild House (pictured), was commissioned by a Quaker organization to house low-income elderly tenants?
- I agree that the alternate hook is more interesting, thanks Maile. Camerafiend (talk) 00:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Of the two sources used for the Quaker organization part of the hook, ref 5 merely mentions the name of the Friends Neighborhood Guild but does not make any mention of Guild House in the book or on the relevant page—is it there to establish that the Guild is indeed a Friends (Quaker) organization?—and ref 6, which seems to be the entire basis for the hook fact, is unavailable on line. I agree that it's an interesting fact, and there's nothing at all wrong with offline hooks, but I'm uneasy that a proposed ALT hook has been reviewed by its creator rather than independently and that there was no indication that the hook relies on AGF sourcing. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:52, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
- Well, that's OK - let's get another reviewer for either hook. Ref 5 is there to link the Friends guild to Quakers, because we cannot assume that all readers know Quakers call themselves Friends. Ref 10 actually links the Guild, the Society of Friends, and the term Quaker. Let's get a second reviewer on this, if you think that is what is needed. — Maile (talk) 19:09, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, get a new reviewer if necessary. I didn't intend my comment as a review, I was just offering an opinion as requested. For what it's worth the cited text in the offline source reads "The Guild House, an apartment building for low-income elderly persons designed for the Friends Neighborhood Guild..." Camerafiend (talk) 01:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)::
- Just to clarify for you, Camerafiend. Bluemoonset's comment above - I don't think it was meant to infer that you had done a review by agreeing to Alt1. Bluemoonset meant that my giving the green tick to Alt1 was in essence reviewing my own editing. Benign, either way, anyhow. — Maile (talk) 12:23, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
- That's exactly right. Camerafiend, your comment was helpful: it's always good to have input on a proposed alternate hook from the creator and/or nominator, because we like to give a certain amount of deference to their wishes: if you had not liked the hook for some reason, it would have been taken into account by the reviewer and promoter going forward. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:35, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
I think the Alt1 hook is covered by refs 5 and 6—thank you, Camerafiend, for quoting the relevant section of the latter!—though you could probably use 6 and 10 there to the same (or even better) effect and drop 5: 10 has "Society of Friends" and "Quaker developers", while 6 has "low-income elderly persons" and "designed for the Friends Neighborhood Guild", and both mention Guild House. But as it stands, this is ready to go; no need to go searching for another reviewer when I've done the checking and my concerns have been addressed. Rest of the requirements per Maile66's review, including approval of original hook, but I agree with the others: ALT1 is better. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
