Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Merchant's House Museum/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merchant's House Museum

[edit]

Merchant's House Museum (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Epicgenius (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a historic house in New York City, built in the 1830s for the Tredwell family, at a time when the surrounding neighborhood was an upscale residential area. The house remained in the family for almost a century, even as most of the family's wealthy neighbors moved away. After the last child died, the house became a museum in 1936, narrowly avoiding demolition. Despite being a relatively low-profile museum even today, the Merchant's House Museum was one of NYC's first-ever official landmarks, and you can still see many of the family's possessions on display there. Amazingly, unlike literally every other 19th-century residence in NYC, the house still retains its original design as well.

This page became a Good Article this June after a GAN review by several editors, for which I am very grateful. After some recent copyedits by Mox Eden, which I greatly appreciate as well, I think the page is up to FA quality. I look forward to all comments and feedback. Epicgenius (talk) 15:15, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Crisco

[edit]
  • Several of the images could use a crop.
  • Is this biographic information on Tredwell best suited in its own section? Seems jarring to go from the site to biographic information.
    • I'm not sure. This paragraph is short because I wanted to provide only just enough context to introduce the house's original owner, since the article is about the house rather than Tredwell. I've reworded this to "The house was first occupied by Seabury Tredwell..." Epicgenius (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • photos of the interiors - Is "photos" used at this level, given its informality? Perhaps "images" or "depictions"?
  • 1930s to 1960s - Worth having an "adjusted for inflation" for the items in this section, given the years between each figure?
  • Staten Island - You link Manhattan and New York City, so I'd link Staten Island, The Christian Science Monitor, party wall, Chicago Tribune
  • it distributed another matching grant of $12,000 in 1972. The trust provided another matching grant of $35,000 in 1975 - Worth combining as " it distributed matching grants of $12,000 in 1972 and $35,000 in 1975?

More to follow — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:30, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments so far, @Crisco 1492. I'll work on your first point and have addressed the others. Epicgenius (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • To the west and east of the house are party walls made of brick; these party walls were originally shared by the houses on either side.[57] - Perhaps "To the west and east of the house are party walls made of brick, which were originally shared by the houses on either side.[57]
  • 14-foot-tall (4.3 m) - would it not be 14-foot (4.3-m) tall?
    • Not really. The two are fairly similar, but the phrase "14-foot-tall" merely describes something that is 14 feet tall. By contrast, "14-foot tall" can mean that something is 14 feet and tall, but if taken literally, the 14-foot dimension might not necessarily be its height (most people would still understand it to mean "14-foot-tall", though). Epicgenius (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The rooms are connected to each other by an arched partition
  • ... an arched partition flanked by Ionic fluted columns, which shield a sliding mahogany door between the rooms.[76][124] The sliding door originally had silver-plated trim.[17] The bases of these columns are octagonal in shape, while the capitals are decorated with anthemia. - Seems strange to go columns, door, door, columns. Perhaps rephrase?
  • There is allegedly a secret passage in the wall between the two first-floor parlors, which leads up to a drawer between the second-story master bedrooms. - Seems like the rest of the paragraph confirms its existence.
  • Is the attic one of those small, almost crawlspace deals, or is it a full storey (I've lived in an old Victorian where the attic was basically another storey, with the ceiling about 80% of the height of the other storeys, hence the question)
    • It's basically a half-story with a lower-than-normal ceiling, although it does have some windows. Unfortunately there are no reliable sources that confirm this, so that's why there isn't any more detail about the attic. Epicgenius (talk) 01:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Old Merchant's House Inc. runs an online gift shop.[129] Old Merchant's House Inc. has an endowment fund - I'd recommend against repeating the name twice in succession
  • The items were broadly split into three categories. - Were or are? Just because they're no longer exhibited doesn't mean they've been deaccessioned.
    • Oops, good point. They still are divided into three stories.
  • The house also had a music box,[33][137] a grand piano made by Nunns & Fischer,[78] oil lamps,[35] cupboards with rare china, and brass doorknobs.[110] Toys and clothes are displayed on the upper floors.[123] - You jump from earlier collections/exhibitions to current ones and then back to the 1980s. Might be easier to follow if chronological. I'm also seeing a mix of current and previous exhibits in the next paragraph
  • In 1991, the Greenwich Village Society for Historic Preservation and the Merchant's House Museum launched an educational program called Greenwich Village: History and Historic Preservation. The program ran through the end of the 1990s at the museum but eventually shifted its focus to the West Village.[140] - More repetition (program)
  • Several events are regularly hosted at the house.[81] The parlors regularly host music concerts - Regularly ... regularly
  • Over the years, the house has also hosted other events. It hosted a 1946 benefit for the American Friends of France,[144] though in 1956, the museum's operators prevented Alfred Hitchcock from shooting a movie there.[145] - "Though" doesn't seem to work here. Ironically, the Hitchcock bit works better with the next sentence.
  • Any dates on these plays? Terry died in 1928, and the title makes it sound like she was involved... but the house wasn't a museum yet.
  • More potential links: Vogue, Los Angeles Times, American Heritage, The Village Voice
  • The Christian Science Monitor - You use the Christian Science Monitor on first mention, and The Christian Science Monitor thereafter; I believe the second is correct.
  • "has been sadly altered" - Given the continued emphasis on the house's general intactness, are examples given?
    • I've reread this, and apparently this is missing some context. Meeker disapproved of the items shown in the museum; it wasn't that the interior architecture itself was modified. I've changed this a bit. Epicgenius (talk) 19:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, article seems quite comprehensive.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492, thanks again for the comments. I've addressed all of the remaining issues now. Epicgenius (talk) 19:00, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Lee Vilenski

[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

Lede
Prose
Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments Vilenski. I'll work on these shortly. (Also I forgot that I was going to review your FAC nomination, I'll probably do that tomorrow too.) – Epicgenius (talk) 17:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Thanks again for the comments. I think I've addressed or replied to all of them now. Epicgenius (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to support. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from PMC

[edit]

I'll pop in here eventually. Give me a sharp poke if I don't get to it within the usual slightly-over-a-week. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 13:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Did Brewster build one house on the lot, or six? Site says it was one of six, but History seems to suggest it was just one?
  • Only a mild objection, but is Tredwell's ancestor relevant to the house? I guess it tells you where his name came from, but still.
    • Yeah, I included Seabury's name because he was indeed Tredwell's namesake. (Also, the text mentions a "prominent Long Island family", and I wanted to give an example of a notable family member.) Epicgenius (talk) 14:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Fair enough
  • "The architectural writer Donald Reynolds wrote..." is there much dispute about the following facts? If not, no real need to attribute in-text
  • "They gradually upgraded..." sentence uses ref 15 twice. Also, suggest slight tweak to 'wished to retain the furnishings largely "as Papa wanted it"', because the fact that they did upgrade things seems to contradict strictly keeping to Papa's style.
  • "Burdened with severe financial hardship" Not sure you need "severe" when she's already "burdened"
  • "Chapman's wife cleared out" normally when you clear out objects, it's to get rid of them. But these were cleared out then returned?
    • It seems so. I think the intention was to auction off the objects and sell or demolish the home, but then it was converted to a museum instead. Epicgenius (talk) 14:49, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Hm, okay. If the source doesn't clarify, it is what it is.
  • First sentence under 1930s to 1960s uses "the museum" twice, and the next sentence opens with it. Can we write around this?
  • "but its 50-cent admission fee" - I might say "and", because the clause is in agreement with the previous clause, not making an exception to it
  • " he managed to pay off the mortgage" do we know when and by what means?
    • The sources unfortunately don't indicate when the mortgage was paid off, but I assume it was paid off using cash. I've moved it up to the end of the sentence "George Chapman purchased the building, saving it from foreclosure and demolition". Epicgenius (talk) 15:16, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • First para in Architecture swings between past and present tense ("wrote" but also "writes"). Should be past, but with that note, you have three "write/wrote" very close to each other
  • "mixture of the Empire and Victorian styles" are these linkable?
  • You've got Ms. Huxtable full-named and full-linked thrice, twice with context. Do we need all that?
  • Para 2 in this section feels repetitive. We've got one dissenter, Vogue, who calls it something else, but everybody else is firmly saying it's Federal and Greek. Do we need to repeat each of them, or can we sum most of them up with something like "most critics describe the building as...something something" and then tack Vogue on to the end as having different ideas
    • I've condensed this a bit. From the looks of it, most of the sources describe the house as being Federal and Greek Revival, without specifying that the facade is one style and the interior is another. The sources even disagree over which style is more predominant; the National Park Service says it's the Greek Revival style, while the Chicago Tribune article seems to imply that it's the Federal style instead. Epicgenius (talk) 15:16, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Epicgenius. Have you addressed all of the comments? If so, could you ping PMC? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild, I have addressed all the comments. I didn't realize that I forgot to ping @Premeditated Chaos, so thanks for the reminder.
@Premeditated Chaos, thanks for the additional comments. I've addressed them now. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the last round, very sorry for taking so long.

That's all I have. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the remaining comments, @PMC. I've addressed them now. Epicgenius (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a support. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image and source review

[edit]

File:Historic American Buildings Survey, Arnold Moses, Photographer March 5, 1936, FRONT ELEVATION. - Seabury Tredwell House, 29 East Fourth Street, New York, New York County, NY HABS NY,31-NEYO,30-2 (cropped).tif, File:Historic American Buildings Survey, Wohlfahrt Studio, Photographer May 25, 1936, FIRST FLOOR HALL SHOWING STAIRS. - Seabury Tredwell House, 29 East Fourth Street, New York, New HABS NY,31-NEYO,30-10 (cropped).tif, File:Historic American Buildings Survey, Wohlfahrt Studio, Photographer May 25, 1936, KITCHEN FIREPLACE. - Seabury Tredwell House, 29 East Fourth Street, New York, New York County, NY HABS NY,31-NEYO,30-17 (cropped).tif and File:Historic American Buildings Survey, Wohlfahrt Studio, Photographer May 25, 1936, DRAPED WINDOWS AND BED - FRONT BEDROOM, SECOND FLOOR. - Seabury Tredwell House, 29 East Fourth HABS NY,31-NEYO,30-19 (cropped).tif have a bunch of bare URLs. ALT text is OK.

Don't think that The Christian Science Monitor, The New York Times, New York Herald Tribune, Wall Street Journal and Los Angeles Times get an ISSN. 'specially since The Atlanta Constitution doesn't get one either. I notice that New York Times sometimes links to articles and sometimes doesn't. What makes AmNY, Time Out, Conde Nest Traveller, guidestar.org, Playbill, rew-online.com, news.artnet.com/ and The Village Voice high-quality reliable sources? I am not saying they are necessarily unreliable, but I need more information. What's Town & Country and The Sun? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the source and image reviews, @Jo-Jo Eumerus. Here are my responses:
  • I'm not sure what should be done with the URLs in these images. The images are hosted on Commons, and the URLs doesn't really affect the display of the article itself.
  • AmNewYork Metro is NYC's main free daily newspaper. They have editorial oversight, and from the looks of it, this is a reliable source in its field.
  • Time Out New York is part of the Time Out series of magazines. They also have editorial oversight, and although they do publish reviews of attractions such as bars and restaurants, their non-review content is generally reliable.
  • Conde Nast Traveler is a travel magazine published by Condé Nast. They also have editorial oversight, but the only use of the CN Traveler in this article is for a review.
  • GuideStar is a database of nonprofits operated by Candid (organization).
  • Playbill is a theatre magazine. They do seem to have solid editorial oversight (and, unlike some other magazines, don't have freelancers).
  • Real Estate Weekly is a real estate magazine. Their website seems to be down right now, but from what I can recall, they also have editorial oversight.
  • Artnet is an art market website. This is probably the only source on the list that I don't have full confidence in, so I've removed it.
  • The Village Voice is a weekly newspaper, which also seems to have editorial oversight. I've found them to be reliable for info regarding Manhattan (they don't really publish many articles about the outer boroughs).
  • Town and Country (magazine) is a magazine, and The Sun is actually supposed to be The Baltimore Sun, Baltimore's newspaper of record.
I hope this helps. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd imagine you could go to Commons and edit them so that they have information that could help us restore them if the websites reorganize. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus, sounds good. I've formatted these bare URLs. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I guess. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SC

[edit]

Comments to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 10:25, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • "built the house as a speculative development and sold the house": "and sold it"?
  • There are seven uses of "house" in the paragraph (as well as six in the first para and five in the third), and a couple of synonyms could be used. I think you can use "building" when talking about the building, particularly as it hasn't technically been a house since the 1930s ("the deteriorating house" ->"the deteriorating building", for example)
Use as residence

Done to the start of the 1970s renovation; more to come. - SchroCat (talk) 10:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback so far SC. I've now addressed the issues you've raised. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1970s renovation
  • "project was Joseph Roberto's wife": why not just "Roberto's wife"?
Architecture
Operation
  • "In addition, Old Merchant's House Inc. runs": You don't need the "In addition"
  • Link for pie safe (it's not common outside the US, and I wonder just how well known the term is to most Americans)
  • "shoot a movie": a bit slangy and informal. "produce a film" would work

That's my lot. - SchroCat (talk)

Thanks again @SC. I've fixed the additional issues you mentioned. (I don't have a pie safe, nor do I know anyone who still does, so I'm surprised that I hadn't linked it, but that's been fixed now.) – Epicgenius (talk) 19:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

[edit]

Thanks for the comments Gog. I've responded to all of them now. Epicgenius (talk) 16:32, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

[edit]
  • "During the 2010s and 2020s, museum officials opposed the construction of a nearby hotel because of concerns over the house's structural integrity." 1. "concerns over the house's structural integrity" is vague and needs clarifying. Do you mean that the house is so unsound that nearby construction would be dangerous? 2. You should say whether the opposition was successful.
  • "an ornate doorway" front doorway?
  • "The museum also presents" People present, museume do not.
  • "a depth of 128.83 feet" What does the depth of a lot mean?
  • "Several doors east of the museum, at 37 East Fourth Street, is the Samuel Tredwell Skidmore House, a three-story Greek Revival house built for a cousin of one of 29 East Fourth Street's early residents, Seabury Tredwell.[10][11] The Skidmore House was the residence of Skidmore, his wife, eight children, and a nurse. Designated as a New York City landmark in 1970,[11] the Skidmore House was restored by 2010 after falling into disrepair." This is far too much irrelevant detail.
  • "almost all were Irish women, and they never worked more than a decade.[29] Relatives of the family occasionally stayed at the building when they had nowhere else to stay". More irrelevant details.
  • "With no income, the sisters subsisted on their father's estate,[28] selling off land in Brooklyn and New Jersey as money became scarcer.[33] Sarah eventually moved to the Cadillac Hotel near Times Square, where she died in 1906, leaving just Phebe, Julia, and Gertrude." You say no income, but the fact that they had land and Sarah lived in a hotel implies that they did.
    • They didn't necessarily have a fixed income - for example, Sarah may have used savings to pay for the hotel. The land was also part of their existing holdings, which can count as income, just not a steady source. Epicgenius (talk) 22:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early twentieth century section. Far too much detail.
  • "Chapman's wife removed enough objects to fill two vans; these objects were later placed on display in the house." You mean that they were taken and then returned? So what?
  • Done to 1970s renovation. There is much that is interesting in this article, but in my opinion it is not FA standard as it is padded out with far too many trivial and tangential details. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:06, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the comments @Dudley, but I don't quite agree regarding the details (nor your opinion that this article isn't FA standard). To give just one example, you point out "almost all were Irish women, and they never worked more than a decade. Relatives of the family occasionally stayed at the building when they had nowhere else to stay" as an example of "irrelevant" detail. However, it's directly related to the house's occupancy and use at that time. I felt like these details were necessary for the article to meet WP:FACR's comprehensiveness criterion.
    I will, however, consider condensing some of these details. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks again for the comments. I've taken the time to condense some of the unnecessary details in the article, especially regarding historical and architectural details. The prose size has now decreased by roughly 10%, but all of the major facts have been retained. I appreciate your feedback and hope you will reconsider your opinion of this nomination. Epicgenius (talk) 23:01, 22 December 2024 (UTC) (Edited. Epicgenius (talk) 17:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC))[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Merchant%27s_House_Museum/archive1&oldid=1264815570"