Talk:1501 Broadway

1501 Broadway has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 23, 2022. (Reviewed version).

A fact from 1501 Broadway appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 December 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that to celebrate the Paramount Building's construction, oxen and lamb were roasted over the ruins of the previous building on the site?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/December. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1501 Broadway.

Wikipedia

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skyscrapers Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Theatre Mid‑importance

	Theatre portal This article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject TheatreTemplate:WikiProject TheatreTheatre articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Infobox[edit]

The {{Infobox NRHP}} currently used in this article is not suitable because the building is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places. {{Infobox building}} would be a better alternative. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 19:04, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's being used for convenience, since it's easy with the NRHP template to add the NYC landmark fields, which would not be possible with the building template. Aside from that, it's often the case the NYC landmarks become listed on the NRHP some years later -- not always, but often enough. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:59, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it is possible to add the NYC landmark fields to an Infobox building using {{Designation list}}. It probably not a good to wait until it is listed on the NRHP because it is currently in a hidden, maintenance category caused by the absence of the NRHP reference number. So, it is entirely possible that another editor would attempt to try and fix the problem. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 21:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you know how to switch it to the building template and keep the NYC landmark designation, give it a try. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I re-added the NHRP box and left open the spots in case it does get added. Any concerns/complaints? FriarTuck1981 (talk) 22:34, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the NRHP infobox has some side effects, one of which is adding it to various error categories, such as NRHP infobox needing cleanup if there is no NRHP reference number. I replaced the infobox with a designation list box. Generic1139 (talk) 20:47, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Theater dismantling?[edit]

When the theater in the building was dismantled, what was that space converted to? A 3000+ seat theater isn't exactly a small venue. --RThompson82 (talk) 04:15, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 SL93 (talk) 01:11, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The Paramount Building at 1501 Broadway

... that 1501 Broadway, overlooking New York City's Times Square, was once described as "the greatest shadow that shadows have built"? Source: Mumford, Lewis (December 22, 1926). "Magnified Impotence". The New Republic. 49: 138–140.
- ALT1: ... that the Paramount Building's developers received a marble eagle from Mussolini during the building's construction? Source: "Mussolini Sends Gift to Movie Producers; Famous Players-lasky Receives Eagle From Caesars' Palace for Paramount Building". The New York Times. August 8, 1926.
- ALT2: ... that to celebrate the Paramount Building's construction, oxen and lamb were roasted over the ruins of the previous building on the site? Source: "Broadway Barbecue Is Moved Indoors; Famous Players Abandon Celebration on Times Square Building Site for Fear of Accidents". The New York Times. August 2, 1925.
- ALT3: ... that the Paramount Building was the tallest building in Times Square when it was completed? Source: New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission; Dolkart, Andrew S.; Postal, Matthew A. (2009). Postal, Matthew A. (ed.). Guide to New York City Landmarks (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. pp. 90-91

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Russ Island

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 23:12, 18 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

An impressive expansion by EpicGenius. I was intrigued by the ALT1 hook about Mussolini's eagle — animals always make things more lively. I remember when the King of Sweden was gifted some Lippizaner horses by the Sultan of Brunei... but I digress. Anyway, when I checked, I realized I had misunderstood; it wasn't an animal, it was a marble eagle. I guess hooks aren't supposed to draw people in by misleading them, so it ought surely to say "received a marble eagle from Mussolini". Not as cool, but more factual, and Mussolini is in himself a fine hook character. I'd support that hook. Bishonen | tålk 20:37, 26 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

@Bishonen: Whoops, that must've been a mistake on my part. I guess it might be more accurate, though slightly less hooky, to say that there was a marble eagle, so I've fixed it now. Thanks for reviewing the nomination. Epicgenius (talk) 04:28, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Bishonen: Sorry, I forgot to ask: was that a general comment or a DYK review? If it was a DYK review, then it can only be promoted if Template:DYKtick or Template:DYKtickAGF is added. If that was a general comment, then no worries. Epicgenius (talk) 14:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid it was a general comment. I'm new here, and, while I originally intended to review, I was seriously put off by all the formalia. Bishonen | tålk 15:17, 7 December 2021 (UTC).[reply]

No problem. I will ask someone else to conduct a formal review in that case. This article does not have a full review yet. Epicgenius (talk) 16:58, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna take a look later. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:27, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I've taken a look at the article and it meets all of the DYK requirements. A QPQ has also been done here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:58, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay so I'll be assuming good faith for the sources provided since they're either offline or NYT (and I don't want to trigger the paywall). While all of the hooks are suitable, personally I think that ALT2 is the quirkiest hook of the bunch: I mean, who doesn't like a good barbecue? Article is good to go. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 12:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]