![]() | New York Times Building (41 Park Row) has been listed as one of the
Art and architecture good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: October 13, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from New York Times Building (41 Park Row) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 8 August 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The result was: promoted by
The Squirrel Conspiracy (
talk)
16:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
5x expanded by Epicgenius ( talk). Self-nominated at 18:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC).
Would "
Former New York Times Building" be a better/less ambiguous title for this building, per its designation? It's easy to confuse "
New York Times Building (41 Park Row)" with other Times Buildings, even with the parenthetical disambiguation, especially when the Times hasn't been there in so long. (not
watching, please {{
ping}}
)
czar
04:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
I find the "Previous buildings" section hard to follow. The second paragraph especially is out of chronological order. While discussing the building begun in 1857, it mentions 21-century critics' opinion of the 1851 building. (Or is that an error of some sort?) That switch means it took me a while to figure out for sure which building was being described in the following sentences. After that, we read about what happened in 1881, followed by 1873, then 1882.
I found the quote from Harper's Weekly, the comparison to the Tribune, and the description of the Times' reputation to be distracting in a discussion of the buildings.
Is the identity of Wesley, Keep, James, Raymond, Jones, and Raymond significant enough to include here in a discussion of buildings? There's a lot of information in here! 75.58.160.64 ( talk) 19:48, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
I recently saw a picture of the building circa 1900 with the pedestrian entrance to the Brooklyn Bridge in the foreground and was intrigued by the overhead interior lighting visible on the upper floors. Since flourescent lighting was not introduced until 1934, wondering what that was? 173.27.82.92 ( talk) 18:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
![]() | New York Times Building (41 Park Row) has been listed as one of the
Art and architecture good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: October 13, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from New York Times Building (41 Park Row) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 8 August 2020 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
The result was: promoted by
The Squirrel Conspiracy (
talk)
16:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
5x expanded by Epicgenius ( talk). Self-nominated at 18:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC).
Would "
Former New York Times Building" be a better/less ambiguous title for this building, per its designation? It's easy to confuse "
New York Times Building (41 Park Row)" with other Times Buildings, even with the parenthetical disambiguation, especially when the Times hasn't been there in so long. (not
watching, please {{
ping}}
)
czar
04:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
I find the "Previous buildings" section hard to follow. The second paragraph especially is out of chronological order. While discussing the building begun in 1857, it mentions 21-century critics' opinion of the 1851 building. (Or is that an error of some sort?) That switch means it took me a while to figure out for sure which building was being described in the following sentences. After that, we read about what happened in 1881, followed by 1873, then 1882.
I found the quote from Harper's Weekly, the comparison to the Tribune, and the description of the Times' reputation to be distracting in a discussion of the buildings.
Is the identity of Wesley, Keep, James, Raymond, Jones, and Raymond significant enough to include here in a discussion of buildings? There's a lot of information in here! 75.58.160.64 ( talk) 19:48, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
I recently saw a picture of the building circa 1900 with the pedestrian entrance to the Brooklyn Bridge in the foreground and was intrigued by the overhead interior lighting visible on the upper floors. Since flourescent lighting was not introduced until 1934, wondering what that was? 173.27.82.92 ( talk) 18:30, 4 February 2024 (UTC)