A fact from 220 Central Park South appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 November 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that when it changed hands in 2019, a "mega condo" in 220 Central Park South became the most expensive residence ever sold in the United States?
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
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
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
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
Yoninah (
talk) 18:41, 8 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Overall: epicgenius, I’ve completed my review of this article and the hooks and find that they meet or exceed DYK criteria. I confirmed the article’s 5x expansion, which began on 27 Oct, and is now at 17693 characters (2889 words) compared to 2834 characters (466 words) on 4 Oct. The hook image is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0, and the other images in the article are licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 and CC BY-SA 3.0. While I assess that all hooks are “hooky,” have verifiable content from reliable sources, and are of an appropriate length, I prefer the original hook.
West Virginian (talk) 13:19, 30 October 2020 (UTC)reply
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
The phrasing on "A motor court with a porte-cochere, where vehicles could drop off and pick up residents and their guests, is alongside the two wings of 220 Central Park South." is pretty passive-voice. Other than that the prose is pretty good.
The lead is well-written and doesn't include cites (appreciated, for non-controversial claims). The article looks fine overall. I don't quite understand why you chose to use {{
rp}}, but that's just a stylistic choice and obviously allowed in the MOS.
Yeah, it's hard to find non-primary sources for some claims. However, in this case I didn't consider the NYC government to be a primary source, as they're not directly connected to the subject. In this case, the government is participating as a third party.
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Licensing on
File:220cpsdec13.jpg is a bit iffy. The source is "www.yimbynews.com" which is currently a deadlink. If you can find evidence that this was originally published under cc-by-sa 3.0, then there's no issue, but I don't see where that is.
I've removed it. There's a good chance this is a copyright violation.
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)reply
Article is well-written and very close to passing, but there are just a few issues to address. If no action is taken within seven days, I'll have to fail the article - if the issues are addressed adequately, I'll pass it. Feel free to ask me any follow-up questions.
Elliot321 (
talk |
contribs) 12:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Elliott321: Thanks for the review. I've addressed all these issues now.
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)reply
@
WPmurphy: In relation to your edit summary
here, I was referring to your edit
here. Your edit summary was "220 Central Park South (225 W 58th St) is locted north of Central Park Tower (225 W 57th St) so it blocks the view from the CPT to the north not to the south". This is correct, I wasn't disputing it.
Your edit changed "south" to "north" in the following sentence: Additionally, Vornado had to settle a dispute with
Extell, which owned a garage on the site and had expressed concern that Vornado's structure would block views of Extell's
Central Park Tower directly to the south. You changed it to Central Park Tower directly to the north. So this was where the ambiguity arose, because there's 2 ways of interpreting this:
The phrase "directly to the south" refers to "Central Park Tower" only. Since Central Park Tower is south of 220 CPS, then 220 CPS would block the northward views of Central Park Tower. That's how I interpreted it, which is why I reverted you at first. That was my mistake, because the object of the phrase "directly to the south" was apparently unclear.
The phrase "directly to the south" refers to "views of Extell's Central Park Tower". As the views are heading north, your edit would be accurate. But this also has the same lack of clarity as the previous bullet point, which is why I changed it again to the current wording.
I hope this clears up the sequence of edits.
Epicgenius (
talk) 21:51, 20 August 2021 (UTC)reply
Ofer Yardeni - Sells his apartment at 220 Central Park South
Ofer Yardeni has sold his apartment at 220 Central Park South. He should be removed as an owner. Please see article below from The Real Deal.