Talk:5 Times Square
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Kavyansh.Singh in topic Did you know nomination
 | 5 Times Square 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: January 3, 2022. (Reviewed version). |
 | A fact from 5 Times Square appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 October 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
edit- 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 Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- ... that when the lease of Times Square Tower's main tenant was canceled, hundreds of workers were hired at a rival firm at the neighboring 5 Times Square? Source: Schoolman, Judith (May 29, 2002). "Andersen Exodus Grows". New York Daily News. p. 47. Info is in the 5 Times Square article.
- ALT1:... that Times Square Tower and 5 Times Square, across the street from each other, were built for rival accounting firms during a redevelopment of New York City's Times Square? Source: Schoolman, Judith (May 29, 2002). "Andersen Exodus Grows". New York Daily News. p. 47
- ALT2:... that Times Square Tower and 5 Times Square were allowed to bypass New York City zoning codes but had to include huge billboards? Source: Brazil, Aine M.; Gottlieb, Eli (2004). "A Tale of Two Towers; The Structures". Civil Engineering. 74 (6): 46.
- Reviewed: Marshall v. Holmes and Graver v. Faurot (2 out of the 3 available)
- Comment: QPQs pending. If none of these work, I can propose separate hooks for both.
Created by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 00:27, 1 October 2021 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
- Interesting:
- I've reread ALT0 several times and it's still confusing. ALT1 and ALT2 work.
QPQ: - Pending
Overall: Ping me when the QPQs are added and I'll approve ALT1 and ALT2! ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 05:17, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Ezlev: Thanks for the review. I have done 2 QPQs now (actually a nomination with 3 articles, but I'm saving the remaining credit for later). As for ALT0, the accounting firm Arthur Andersen was supposed to be the main tenant at Times Square Tower, but its lease was canceled; Ernst & Young was developing 5 Times Square across the street, and it hired some of the Arthur Andersen workers that would've moved into Times Square Tower. Epicgenius (talk) 12:29, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
ALT1 and ALT2 are good to go! Your explanation of ALT0 makes perfect sense and is interesting, but the cause and effect as you’ve explained them aren’t very clear in the hook. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 15:55, 4 October 2021 (UTC)