Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New York City

North Cove Marina and Brookfield Place

Is North Cove Marina considered part of the Brookfield Place (New York City) complex? Should it be included in that category and the related World Trade Center infobox?

More specificity on the assessment section's importance scale?

We don't appear to have a standard for articles pertaining to demographic groups. History of the Jews in New York City, for example, was rated Mid-importance, while Nuyorican was rated Low-importance and Italians in New York City was rated High-importance. This seems kind of inconsistent and I think we should have a standard.

Given that neighborhoods are considered High-importance, it seems reasonable to put demographic groups in general in the same category, with sub-topics related to those groups (history, sub-groups, etc.) in Mid-importance. Thoughts? AspiringGnome (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I find that most of the ratings are questionable. I often see something show up on Article alerts and when I go look at it, I don't see how it has anything to do with NYC. On closer inspection, it usually turns out that it's a person who at one time lived in NYC, or a company that had an office here, or something like that, so they get a NYC project banner with a "Low importance" rating. So, yes, I'd like to see us adopt some more useful classification system with reasonable standards/guidance. RoySmith (talk) 12:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)

My feeling is that "X in NYC" should, at the very least, be high importance because they are directly related to the subject (though it depends on how vital"these topics are to NYC). Other topics not directly related should be low importance. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:08, 28 April 2026 (UTC)

This would be my proposed edit of the importance scale. In particular:

• Demographic groups would fall under High-importance
• Mid-level concepts related to the city would also be High-importance
• Highly externally-significant organizations based in NYC, but with no other significant connection, would be Mid-importance; all others would be low-importance
• Places, events, organizations, people, and "Other" would appear as separate categories of examples in the table

Which, if any, of these edits should I make on the project page? AspiringGnome (talk) 20:27, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for taking this on, @AspiringGnome! The breakout into columns is a big win here. I could dispute and nitpick some of the examples, but the Top/High/Mid criteria are conceptually strong.

• I might suggest the mayor of the city tends to be nationally prominent and should be top importance. But, say, a police commissioner is locally important and high importance.
• The NYT might not be a good example of an org that's only important locally -- it's a very highly regarded paper nationally and internationally. I'd rate that one Top importance, and suggest the NY Post or Daily News as a locally important example. Similarly the parade is broadcast, watched, and looked forward to countrywide even if it's an even bigger deal here. It might or might not be top importance, but it's not the best example of what's described. The annual Macy's fireworks might be a better example of a recurring event that's only locally relevant.
• If we're going to describe "tangential" connections, I might specify that "tangential" connections include being born or having lived in the city.

Here's where I disagree about the scale itself:

• I'd dispute that being born/having lived in a city makes a person relevant to the project at all. In the sense of "how does this help someone interested in learning about the city know more about the city?"
• Honestly for a lot of the low-importance examples I wonder why they should be in the wikiproject at all. The subway stops and sports seasons being the exception there.

My suggested criterion for inclusion in the project would be "it affects/affected the city" rather than "the city affected it".

-- Avocado (talk) 11:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree with "I'd dispute that being born/having lived in a city makes a person relevant to the project at all." If you've done something significant to affect the city, sure. But just being born/lived here, not so much. The same with companies. I see lots of NYC-tagged articles about companies whose only association with the city is that they have an office here. RoySmith (talk) 12:00, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Another example that just came up in this morning's batch of alerts: Draft:American Nomads. Not all things that exist in NYC are of interest to the project. What makes them of interest to the project is that there's some specific connection to the city. RoySmith (talk) 12:30, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions! I have updated my proposed importance scale to reflect most of them.

@Avocado: The NYT might not be a good example of an org that's only important locally -- it's a very highly regarded paper nationally and internationally.

Fixed

@Avocado: Similarly the parade is broadcast, watched, and looked forward to countrywide even if it's an even bigger deal here

As it turns out, the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade is the only recurring event listed as High-importance. I attempted to split hairs here by saying Top-importance is internationally significant and High-importance is nationally significant. All of the other potential examples I could think of (Puerto Rican Day Parade, Saint Patrick's Day Parade, Shakespeare in the Park, etc) were listed as Mid-importance or lower.

@Avocado: My suggested criterion for inclusion in the project would be "it affects/affected the city" rather than "the city affected it".

I completely agree; I was just copying over the existing text. I have updated it to specify:

• Mid-importance organizations should affect the city in some way
• Low-importance organizations can primarily be affected by the city, but at the very least minorly affect the city
• Low-importance individuals must have their notability indirectly related to the city (ex. in the existing Alan Greenspan example, he got his start on Wall Street then later presided over policies that deeply affected Wall Street)

AspiringGnome (talk) 19:21, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Whitney Museum#Requested move 25 May 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Whitney Museum#Requested move 25 May 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Epicgenius (talk) 16:44, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive4

Be advised that Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive4 is now underway. Feel free to join the discussion.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:17, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Anthony D. Romero COI Edit request

Hello editors! My name's Sara and I work for the ACLU. I have an open COI edit request on the Anthony D. Romero Wikipedia Talk page that pertains to his upbringing in New York City, if anybody is interested in taking a look. Let's chat on the Talk page if you're interested or have any questions. Thanks ACLUSara (talk) 17:38, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done pburka (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Eagle NYC

Eagle NYC has been nominated for merging:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle NYC

Discussion participation and article improvements welcome ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:24, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Also, anyone able to take a photo of the exterior? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:38, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

 Kept --Another Believer _(Talk) 14:36, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

New Yorker

Does anyone have access to The New Yorker? You might be able to help with a query raised at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eileen Gibb re a piece in The New Yorker about Sammy the Shunter, written by Eileen Gibb Mjroots (talk) 13:51, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done YorkshireLad  ✿  ^(talk) 22:03, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hasted Kraeutler

The article Hasted Kraeutler has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Tagged for notability concerns for 10 years. No other language has a reliably sourced article from which to translate. Completely unsourced article about a private, for-profit art gallery. A Google News search found articles about how it closed in 2015. With great effort, I guess that a properly sourced article could be build, but not from this.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Bearian (talk) 13:05, 17 June 2026 (UTC)