Talk:270 Park Avenue (1960–2021)

270 Park Avenue (1960–2021) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 25, 2022	Good article nominee	Listed
April 22, 2024	Featured article candidate	Promoted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 25, 2022.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Union Carbide bought 270 Park Avenue in 1976 while moving out of the building?

Current status: Featured article

Text and/or other creative content from 270 Park Avenue (1960–2021) was copied or moved into Hotel Marguery. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Text and/or other creative content from 270 Park Avenue (1960–2021) was copied or moved into 270 Park Avenue (2021–present). The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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 (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) 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.

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.

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

Splitting into two articles

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was to split into three articles. WikiRedactor (talk) 21:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does it make sense to split this article into two pages for the old and new buildings respectively? 74.64.122.27 (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure that would be the best thing to do, since the new building is arguably more significant and I think a combination article would be quite long once the new building is finished. --Galebazz (talk) 18:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think we should split this page. Actually, I believe we should split this page into three: Hotel Marguery, what was originally the Union Carbide Building, and the new JPMorgan headquarters. The hotel is not relevant to the other two topics aside from the fact that it occupies the same site. The Union Carbide Building similarly has a distinct history and architecture from the new tower, and that is the topic of the interwiki links, so that building should remain the topic for the present article. The new headquarters should be split into another article. The only issue is what to name the page about the new headquarters, since we cannot have two articles with the same name, unless the Union Carbide article is called "270 Park Avenue (1960–2019)" or something. Epicgenius (talk) 00:33, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on split into three. While the hotel article might be a stub at first, it will certainly encourage more edits on that article than as part of a subsection (see: Meta:structuralism). Pinging Galebazz due to consensus. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 09:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- just realized I pinged the wrong person due to not seeing the IP. My bad. Sorry Galebazz! I'll split myself. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 09:36, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually I'll wait to see what they have to say about the 3-way split. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 09:37, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- No worries about the ping! If you wanted to hear my opinion on the split in to three, I think it is a good idea. Galebazz (talk) 10:08, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of a three way split too. Just need to make sure they have helpful hatnotes and that someone checks all the incoming links once it's done. 81.177.27.61 (talk) 18:25, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I was going to suggest moving this page to 270 Park Avenue (1960–2019) to preserve the page history, but this works too. Epicgenius (talk) 01:31, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

270ParkAvenueNovember.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:270 Park Avenue (1960–2021)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 01:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are reliable.

The image File:270 Park Avenue Photomontage.jpg says it's a derivative work of this, but there seems to be no resemblance between the two.
"The Union Carbide Building received mixed criticism during its existence." Don't you mean "mixed reception" -- i.e. some praise and some criticism? "Mixed criticism" means various kinds of criticism.
Suggest redlinking General Bronze; I get 93 hits in the NYT alone.
"The site of the plaza was supposed to be part of a northward extension of Vanderbilt Avenue to 49th Street, which the New York Central Railroad had built in 1913 but never deeded to the government of New York City": what had the railroad built in 1913? As written this says it was 49th Street, but that can't be right.
"Since there were only six platforms on the upper level that extended to 47th Street." Incomplete sentence.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments @Mike Christie. I have addressed all of these issues now:

I removed the image.
I changed "mixed criticism" to "mixed reception". I was thinking of two things at once at the time: "criticism" and "mixed commentary", and I combined them.
The red link has been added.
I clarified that this refers to Vanderbilt Avenue.
The sentence has been corrected.

– Epicgenius (talk) 21:49, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixes look good; passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 08:33, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

270 Park Avenue

... that the Union Carbide Building, once the world's tallest building designed by a woman, was later the world's tallest building to be demolished peacefully? Source: Salmon, Felix (April 23, 2022). "JPMorgan unveils design of new headquarters". Axios.
- ALT1: ... that for half a century, the Union Carbide Building was the world's tallest building designed by a woman? Source: Salmon, Felix (April 23, 2022). "JPMorgan unveils design of new headquarters". Axios.
- ALT2: ... that for most of its existence, the Union Carbide Building was the world's tallest building designed by a woman? Source: Salmon, Felix (April 23, 2022). "JPMorgan unveils design of new headquarters". Axios. The building held this record for 50 years, and the building existed for 61 years.
- ALT3: ... that during the Union Carbide Building's construction, materials had to be stored several miles away because of railroad tracks in the basement? Source: Mulligan, Hugh A. (May 25, 1958). "Today's Skyscrapers Can Be Built Without Throwing Traffic Into Snarl". Press and Sun-Bulletin. p. 2.
- ALT4: ... that in 1976, Union Carbide bought its headquarters building, from which it was relocating? Source: "News of the Realty Trade". The New York Times. August 29, 1976.
- ALT5: ... that Union Carbide bought 270 Park Avenue in 1976 while moving out of the building? Source: "News of the Realty Trade". The New York Times. August 29, 1976.
- ALT6: ... that less than a decade after 270 Park Avenue underwent the most extensive renovation in its history, the building was completely demolished? Source: "JPMorgan Chase gets LEED Platinum for 270 Park Avenue headquarters". NYREJ. March 26, 2012; Davidson, Justin (May 17, 2021). "What If New York Stopped Knocking Down Buildings?". Intelligencer.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/West Farms Soldiers Cemetery

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 13:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: - Not done
Overall: Another great article in this significant and ongoing series by Epicgenius. ALT 2 is more hooky IMO. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@No Swan So Fine: Thanks for the review. I have now done a QPQ. Epicgenius (talk) 12:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

relying on No Swan So Fine's original review, I'll give this a tick. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/her) 20:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]