Talk:New York Biltmore Hotel/GA1

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 22:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Epicgenius, I am happy to review this article. I hope to complete the article in 7 days, I do hope it will be ok if it runs a bit longer. I will likely have another editor checking my work when I complete the review. Bruxton (talk) 22:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

 Pending

Consider filling in the infobox

*Consider a caption for the infobox image denoting 1917.

• Consider adding etymology i.e. hotel was to be named after the Biltmore Estate in North Carolina
• Consider adding the address
• current tenants
• start date
• completion date
• cost and other relevant details will improve the box
  • Y I have added all of these, except for current tenants. The hotel is technically demolished except for its frame and basement, which were incorporated into the subsequent office building in the site (which is mentioned here as it doesn't yet have a page). Epicgenius (talk) 00:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

MOS:$

• Consider Using MOS:$ US$4.5 million instead of $4.5 million for first appearance and $4.5 million for second appearance.  Done

Layout

• First look: MOS:ORDER portal bars should be "end matter"  Done

Copyright

• Earwig does not alert to violations but I will check citations and references individually.

Check of individual references

• five stories underground - One source 100ft underground but speaking of the rail
• Citation 10 checks out
• Citation 13 checks out
• 14 checks out
• To be done citation 9 under Hotel Rooms section: the sentence "The hotel also had staff bedrooms and several staff lounges." does not seem to be supported by that reference.
  •  Done The info is in ref 12. I've fixed it. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• 156 checks out
• 165 checks out
• 175 checks out
• 239 checks out
• To be done Under use as a meeting place: as well as to several clubhouses for Ivy League alumn- - I do not see "clubhouses" in reference 30. The clubs met there, but not in clubhouses?
  •  Done Yep, I did mean clubs. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Spelling and grammar check

• This is an initial check of spelling and grammar. If you disagree with any proposed change just let me know. There nay be other suggestions for spelling and grammar later in the process. Bruxton (talk) 16:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Prose

Spelling

• In the lead: I think floorplan should be two words.
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Possible spelling error in one reference (ref name="p1240501982): Biltmore Opens Room: Mr. and Mrs. J. J. Kelly Anmng Those Taking Guests
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggested corrections

• Lead section: it officially opened December 31, 1913- consider adding the word "on" as in opened on.
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Basement section: The room was restored in 1985, after the rest of the hotel had been demolished - consider removing the comma as unnecessary punctuation
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Upper stories: because of the presence of the railroad tracks - consider removing "the"
  • I assume you meant the second "the", which I've removed. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Upper stories: during winter months - consider adding "the winter months"
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• The Biltmore as seen in 1914 section: New York governor Al Smith - I think according to MOS:JOBTITLE you have the correct capitalizations for instances like this. Nothing to correct here just mentioning after research.  Done
• Basment section: which was used as a taxi ramp and contains a vaulted ceiling - consider changing to past tense "contained"
  • Y The vaulted ceiling still exists, along with the rest of the driveway. It was used as a taxi ramp previously, but not any longer. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Ground level section: above which was the hotel's air shafts - consider changing to "above which were the hotel's air shafts"
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Hotel rooms section: floor area as did the Biltmore - consider removing "did" as not needed
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• development section
• 1970s section The New York Central had experienced financial decline - consider adding "experienced a financial decline"
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• 1970s sale section: a move that Penn Central had opposed. - consider removing "had" as not needed
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Final days and preservation controversy section: John Russell of New York Times consider adding "of the New York Times"
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Final days and preservation controversy section: All except 150 guests - consider changing to "All but 150 guests"
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Closure and replacement with offices section: despite having known that the hotel - consider changing to "despite knowing that the hotel"
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Office use section: Paul Milstein's son Howard Milstein - consider commas "Paul Milstein's son, Howard Milstein,"
  • Y I didn't add commas because that would imply that Howard was Paul's only son (syntactically, the version with commas is equivalent to "Paul Milstein's son, who was named Howard Milstein"). The version without commas implies that Paul had one or more sons, including Howard; this is the case here, as Paul had two sons. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• same section as above: atrium lobby for $150 million - consider US$150 million
  •  Done. Epicgenius (talk) 00:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Reviewer edits

Please feel free to comment or challenge any of these edits as many are personal opinion Bruxton (talk) 20:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

• I copyedited with synonyms and slight tweaking to remove word repetition. If you are unhappy with the edit you are free to undo or modify. Bruxton (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Also moved the date to the beginning of the sentence Bruxton (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Changed one sentence to "along with" instead of "as were" Bruxton (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• The space could had a capacity of 600 people. Sentence was "The space could fit 600 people in total" If you want to keep the original I suggest "a total of 600 people could fit in the space." Bruxton (talk) 18:11, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Here I created two sentences which I think reads better than the citation interruption
• Here I removed word which seems unnecessary: " simultaneously" Bruxton (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Here I changed said to article "stated" Bruxton (talk) 18:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• changed to Baumann ordered $1 million worth of furniture Bruxton (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
• Reordered one sentence: When the bar opened in 1936 it was open only to men Bruxton (talk) 19:16, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Yes
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Yes
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Yes
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes
	2c. it contains no original research.	Yes
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Yes
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes
	7. Overall assessment.

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.