Talk:Parker Building (New York City)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 08:23, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Parker Building, New York City → Parker Building — This is the only article on Wikipedia about a place actually named the Parker Building. The disambiguation page is merely a collection of redlinks and partial title matches (in fact, it could really be deleted). Station1 (talk) 18:43, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

• Parker Building → Parker Building (disambiguation)

Oppose move. The disambiguation page included as a redlink Parker Building (Brainerd, Minnesota) in properly formatted style (i.e. with supporting bluelink, meeting wp:MOSDAB requirements). I just now started that article. It's a notable building built in 1909 that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The New York City building, by contrast, existed only from 1900 to 1908 when it was destroyed, according to its article. There is no wp:primaryusage for this topic. The New York City one should be moved to Parker Building (New York, New York) or to Parker Building (New York City), i believe. The Requested Move as proposed should not be accepted. --Doncram (talk) 19:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose the dab page most definitely lists other ones. 65.93.13.210 (talk) 03:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
• Oppose We now have two articles at Parker Building, and no case has been made about primary use. It most certainly should not be moved to Parker Building (New York, New York) which is against all our naming conventions. Our general naming convention states that where the disambiguator is a geo-political entity (such as a City), then we use the comma form of separation, unless we are referring to a natural feature, such as a river. Leave it just where it is. Skinsmoke (talk) 14:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

This is a side question, but where is that stated in any general naming convention, specifically? Wide practice for buildings, bridges, other objects in the United States is not that way. Practice does seem as you describe for buildings in England, I believe. You can see the (City, State) practice in many thousands of disambiguation pages including NRHP-listed places. I believe this different treatment is probably good and appropriate, but I believe also it is not described in any general naming convention, and probably should be ratified in some such convention. --doncram 17:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Undiscussed move

Why was this article just renamed from Parker Building, New York City to Parker Building (Manhattan)? The above discussion suggests that there is consensus to move this article at all, and, if there were, that the geographical specifier should not be parenthesized. Pburka (talk) 20:21, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Hey, i'm sorry, i just also moved the page, but to Parker Building (New York City), without seeing that there were any recent moves and unaware of this discussion section. But, "Parker Building, New York City" is clearly not correct, in terms of compliance with general naming practice for U.S. buildings, which generally do use the parenthetical disambiguation. Comma convention is used for British and some other areas. I think the coincidence of a couple editors arriving and moving this comes from focus by several of us on Parker Building (disambiguation) page (or at least that is what brought me here) where the comma-type naming is clearly out of place. I don't have much opinion about New York City aspects. So, anyhow, I think it should be at "Parker Building (New York City)" or "Parker Building (Manhattan)". And there is a 2 to 1 consensus of recent editors that it should be moved somewhere. Is a formal RM needed, or can we just leave it where it is now please and save time and energy. --doncram 02:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Geolocation

The inferred geolocation of this page (e.g. in the places nearby view on the mobile Wikipedia app) is wrong, placing it at 4th Ave and 19th St in Brooklyn. This is possibly due to the fact that there isn't such an intersection in Manhattan anymore, 4th Ave having been renamed to Park Ave. Unfortunately, I don't know how to tag the actual location in the page, so I'm settling for this note. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TimDierks (talk • contribs) 02:53, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

The coordinates in the article were wrong. I've fixed it, hopefully. Thanks for catching the error. Station1 (talk) 05:42, 23 June 2017 (UTC)