This review is transcluded from Talk:Valencia Theatre/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 16:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Actuall7 (talk · contribs) 02:46, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'd like to review this article. Please expect my review in a few days. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 02:46, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Earwig gives a low 25.4% chance of copyvio.
• Nominator is main contributor to the article.
• No recent or present edit warring.
• File:Loews Valencia sunny jeh.jpg Y
• File:Jamaica Tabernackle of Prayer; 2019-11-21.jpg Y
• File:Jamaica Av 165th St td (2018-10-26) 03 - Tabernacle of Prayer (Loew's Valencia Theatre).jpg Y
• File:Loew's Valencia Theatre (52432161755).jpg Y
• File:Merrick Bl 91st Av td (2018-08-02) 02 - Tabernacle of Prayer (Lowe's Valencia Theatre).jpg Y

• When did Loew's Valencia Theatre rename to Valencia Theatre? Or is it more that because its not associated with Loew's that its simply called Valencia Theatre?
  • The latter is correct. - EG
• Should the Valencia Theatre be called a "church building"? I would suggest changing it to simply "church" or "former theatre" as it wasn't a building that was made for a church, which is what "church building" might suggest.
  • Good idea, i've done that. - EG
• In the infobox, add a caption.
  • Done. - EG
• Just a question, why is the Wonder Morton organ mentioned in the lead? Not sure if it's so important to be added in the lead, especially since the Impact section is much more underrepresented.
  • The organ is mentioned because that is the reason why it's classified as a Loew's Wonder Theatre as opposed to a regular cinema. I've added a one-sentence summary of the impact section, though. - EG Epicgenius (talk) 13:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Reading the section about the organ in the Description section again, it's not very clear that the organ was what made the theatre a Loew's Wonder Theatre, instead just sounding like a fixture that all the theatres had. Is it possible to further elaborate on its importance and why it makes Valencia a Loew's Wonder Theatre? Furthermore, Valencia Theatre is incorrectly identified as the Kings Theatre. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 04:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  My bad, I fixed the Kings Theatre thing (i copied the text from that article and forgot to change it). I'll figure out a way to make it more clear that the Wonder Theatres are named for their organs. Epicgenius (talk) 14:03, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Mentioning New York City as New York City, New York, is redundant.
  • Removed. - EG
• Jamaica Avenue is linked twice.
  • Removed the duplicate link. - EG
• The "L"-shaped site wraps -> should be changed to L-shaped site, as previously formatted in the lead.
  • Done. - EG
• wraps around another building at the northwest corner -> is the name of this building known?
  • That building has no real name, so I just mentioned its address. - EG
• Theatre is misspelt in "Lane Theater".
  • Both spellings have been used; for example this source uses the "Theater" spelling. Actually, more recent sources tend to use the "Theater" spelling for that theater. The article for the Lane Theater doesn't exist yet, but both spellings can be mentioned when it eventually is created. - EG
• Similarly to the Paradise Theatre (which Eberson also designed), the Valencia is decorated in a Spanish style. -> not sure if the bracketed mention of Eberson is necessary. The previous sentence already identifies him as the designer of Valencia and Paradise.
  • Removed. - EG
• The booth has with cast metal columns topped by finials -> is this a mistake?
  • Fixed. - EG
• grate leading to a sidewalk vault; three rectangular blind openings; and two more emergency-exit doors. -> are the semicolons really necessary here? I don't see anything wrong with simply using commas.
  • Originally, there was ambiguity in the sentence; if commas were used, it could be interpreted to mean that the grate led to the openings and doors. I have rephrased this to clarify that the grate leads only to the sidewalk vault, and that the openings and doors are part of the facade and not the vault. - EG
• pre–Columbian styles -> should this be a normal dash instead of an endash?
  • No, the endash would be correct per MOS:ENBETWEEN. - EG
• The auditorium walls are adorned with statues, parapets and towers -> should be Oxford comma.
  • Done. - EG
• the ceiling remains unadorned, like a sky above. -> maybe remove the similarity to the sky, as the next paragraph goes in depth of the ceiling.
  • Removed. - EG
• Another chandelier with 360 lights -> was this chandelier one of the three previously mentioned chandeliers?
  • It was not. I've clarified it - EG

• Is Steuart/Hirschman the name of a company?
  • It is. - EG
• copying an issue of National Geographic magazine -> maybe rephrase copying a National Geographic magazine
  • I think this wording could be ambiguous. "Issue" refers specifically to the version of the magazine published on a specific day. "A National Geographic magazine" on its own could mean "one specific copy of a magazine" or "the magazine overall".
• Its first-ever patron, one "Miss Helen Trascey of Ferndale Avenue", had waited several hours to buy her ticket. -> is it really necessary to mention her name? Feels a little unnecessary to mention this at all.
  • Good point, removed. - EG
• For all the films, the date of the film could be added in brackets. Also don't think it's necessary to add who starred in the films.
  • I added the year of each film's creation. Putting them in brackets would also be ambiguous as it could refer to the film's original release date or the date that the film was screened, so I just rephrased these, e.g. "1977 movie". - EG
• cost between 25 and 65 cents a ticket -> cost between 25 to 65 cents a ticket
  • This would be incorrect. Grammatically, the syntax should be "between X and Y", or "X to Y" (no "between"). - EG
• attraction for people in not only Jamaica -> attraction for people not only Jamaica
  • This would also be incorrect because it would result in a missing preposition. - EG
• both of which were also atmospheric theaters. -> before this sentence, there is no mention of Valencia being an atmospheric theatre, except for the one all the way back in the Description section.
  • I don't really see the problem here, as the fact is previously mentioned in the Description section. However, even if it weren't, this sentence implicitly says the Valencia is an atmospheric theater. - EG
• actors and singers like Ginger Rogers and Kate Smith -> should it be actresses and singers?
  • I changed this to "performers". There may have been some male actors but I don't know of any specific ones who appeared there. - EG
• Loew's was sued again in 1944 by a theater operator in Bay Shore, who claimed that the Valencia was violating U.S. antitrust laws because no other theater in the region could screen first-run films. -> could this be trimmed? I think there's no need to state "claimed that the Valencia was violating U.S. antitrust laws because no other theater in the region could screen first-run films." as it's the exact same reason as its previous lawsuit.
  • I changed this to "Loew's was sued again in 1944 by a theater operator in Bay Shore for a similar reason". - EG
• televised boxing matches is repeated twice, consider removing one of them as it sounds repetitive.
  • Fixed. - EG
• Newsday and Variety (magazine) can be linked.
  • Done. - EG
• a Brooklyn–based congregation -> should this use a dash instead of an endash?
  • No, as the existing wording would be correct per MOS:ENBETWEEN. - EG
• one of several movie houses in eastern Queens -> should this be movie palaces instead of movie houses?
  • Not necessarily. A movie palace is a subset of movie houses/movie theaters. I've rephrased it to "movie theaters". - EG Epicgenius (talk) 22:56, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The newspapers can be linked on first mention.
• Other than that, no issues here.

As of this revision.

• [1] Y
• [3] Y
• [5] Y
• [7] Y
• [9] Y Could change to subscription needed.
• [11] Y
• [13] Y Can be linked to Cinema Treasures. Also, this appears to be a blog of sorts, so what is its reliability?
  • The source is a database documenting theaters both extant and no longer in existence. The only blog-style parts of the website are the comments; the entries themselves are database entries. - EG
• [15] Y
• [17] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [19] Y Author's name can expand to Durgin, Chester E. for both sources.
  • Done. - EG
• [21] Y
• [23] Y
• [25] Y
• [27] Y
• [29] Y
• [31] Y
• [33] Y
• [35] Y
• [37] Y
• [39] Y
• [41] Y Second source should have author as Bratton, David. I don't have access to the first source, but the information is verified anyway with other sources.
  • Done. - EG
• [43] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [45] Y
• [47] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [49] Y
• [51] Y
• [53] Y
• [55] Y
• [57] Y Could change to subscription needed. Also, should be MacFarquhar, Neil not Macfarquhar, Neil.
  • I've fixed the author's name. For url-access, non-subscribers should be able to access a limited number of paywalled articles every month, so changed to |url-access=limited. - EG
• [59] On hold I don't appear to be able to access the sources, could you send it to me?
• [61] Y
• [63] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [65] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [67] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [69] Y I don't have access to the first source, but the information is verified anyway with the second source.
• [71] Y I don't have access to the first source, but the information is verified anyway with the second source.
• [73] On hold I don't appear to be able to access the sources, could you send it to me?
• [75] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [77]  Done
• [79] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [81] On hold I don't appear to be able to access the sources, could you send it to me?
• [83] Y
• [85] On hold I don't appear to be able to access this source, could you send it to me?
• [87] Y While I don't have access to this source, will let it go as the title is descriptive enough.
• [89] Y While I don't have access to this source, will let it go as the title is descriptive enough.
• [91] N Page number is wrong, should be 12–13.
  • Fixed. - EG
• [93] Y
• [95] Y While I don't have access to this source, will let it go as the title is descriptive enough.
• [97] Y
• [99] Y
• [101] Y
• [103] Y
• [105] Y
• [107] Y
• [109] Y
• [111] Y
• [113] Y Robert A. M. Stern can be linked as author.
  • Stern's name is linked in the prose. As for the citation itself, it uses a specific-source template, which doesn't link the author by default. - EG
• [115] Y

Alright, finished my source review, hopefully I didn't make any mistakes. Let some sources slide as I didn't want to overwhelm you when you send me the sources. Will be placing on hold now. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 06:06, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Actuall7, thanks for going above and beyond with the detailed FA-level source review. Unfortunately it does not look like I can attach files using Special:EmailUser (maybe I'm just looking in the wrong place). You may have to email me first, and I'll attach the PDFs for these sources in my reply. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:33, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed you @Epicgenius, please let me know if you received it. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 14:43, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Actuall7, thanks. I received it. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:51, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• [17] Y
• [43] Y
• [47] Y
• [59] Y
• [63] Y
• [65] Y Should the title be "Reaching Out For The Trade" instead of "Vaudeville Exploitation"? Also, is the author Matthews, Rives?
• [67] Y
• [73] Y
• [75] Y
• [79] Y
• [81] Y
• [85] Y Page number can be specified to 18-C

Thanks a lot for sending these over @Epicgenius. However, I think you may have accidentally forgotten to send [17] and [79], so if possible could you send me these two? Sorry for the hassle. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 02:04, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My bad. I've emailed these now. – Epicgenius (talk) 04:10, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your hard work @Epicgenius, all the sources check out. No more concerns or issues with the article, will be promoting now. actuall7 (talk | contrib) 05:49, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]