Template:Did you know nominations/Citigroup Center
- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:14, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Citigroup Center
Citicorp (now Citigroup) Center at left-center
- ... that the sloped roof of Citicorp Center (pictured) was originally meant as terraces for residential apartments, which the New York City Department of City Planning would not permit? Source: Horsley, Carter B. (September 19, 1976). "A New Wrinkle On the City's Skyline". The New York Times.
- ALT1:... that an inquiry from an engineering student led to the repair of a structural flaw at New York City's Citicorp Center (pictured)? Source: McGinn, Robert (2018). The Ethical Engineer: Contemporary Concepts and Cases. Princeton University Press. p. 82.
- ALT2:... that a major design flaw at New York City's Citicorp Center (pictured), discovered and repaired in 1978, was not publicized at the time due to a newspaper strike? Source: Postal, Matthew A. (December 6, 2016). "Citicorp Center" (PDF). New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission.
- ALT3:... that New York City's Citigroup Center was built on stilts to overhang a church at one corner? Source: Multiple in article
- ALT4:... that New York City's Citicorp Center (pictured), which originally had a design flaw that could cause it to topple in high winds, was repaired after an inquiry from an engineering student? Source: McGinn, Robert (2018). The Ethical Engineer: Contemporary Concepts and Cases. Princeton University Press. p. 82.
- ALT5:... that the repair of a major design flaw at New York City's Citicorp Center (pictured), which could have caused it to topple in high winds, was not publicized due to a newspaper strike? Source: Postal, Matthew A. (December 6, 2016). "Citicorp Center" (PDF). New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission.
Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 21:24, 3 July 2021 (UTC).
- A quick drive-by comment, I think "structural flaw" might be underselling it a bit. There's a bunch of YouTube videos with titles like "How one design flaw almost toppled a skyscraper", "NYC skyscraper saved by a student's question", "The design flaw that almost wiped out a New York City skyscraper", and "The NYC skyscraper that nearly destroyed Midtown". If those titles aren't overselling it, I think that's clearly the best fact to go with. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment. That's a very good point, I've added a few more alts to address that more interesting aspect. Epicgenius (talk) 16:33, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- Another drive-by comment: Every time I see an article using the word accolade, I want to vomit. EEng 23:22, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
- This article has been recently promoted to GA status, is long enough and policy compliant. QPQ has been done. The image is PD, and used in the article. I like ALT1, ALT2 and ALT5 best, all these hooks are fine and very interesting, with one tiny comment: if this runs with the image, it needs to be made clearer, either in the caption or in the hook, which of the five+ buildings is the Citigroup Center. (it is clear for ALT0, but not the others).
—Kusma (talk) 09:49, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Kusma: Thanks for the review. I have fixed the caption accordingly though, to be honest, I intended the image to be optional. Epicgenius (talk) 23:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius: That should work. It's probably not the strongest image, though, so it's good that you're not saying it must absolutely be used. Happy now.
—Kusma (talk) 10:14, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Epicgenius: That should work. It's probably not the strongest image, though, so it's good that you're not saying it must absolutely be used. Happy now.
- @Kusma: Thanks for the review. I have fixed the caption accordingly though, to be honest, I intended the image to be optional. Epicgenius (talk) 23:08, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
